Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
I just found this board a few minutes ago and until then didn't know it was here. GOD BLESS EACH AND EVERY ONE OF YOU!
BARONE: The coming liberal thugocracy
Michael Barone
COMMENTARY:
"I need you to go out and talk to your friends and talk to your neighbors," Barack Obama told a crowd in Elko, Nev. "I want you to talk to them whether they are independent or whether they are Republican. I want you to argue with them and get in their face." Actually, Obama supporters are doing a lot more than getting into people's faces. They seem determined to shut people up.
That's what Obama supporters, alerted by campaign e-mails, did when conservative Stanley Kurtz appeared on Milt Rosenberg's WGN radio program in Chicago. Mr. Kurtz had been researching Mr. Obama's relationship with unrepentant Weather Underground terrorist William Ayers in Chicago Annenberg Challenge papers in the Richard J. Daley Library in Chicago - papers that were closed off to him for some days, apparently at the behest of Obama supporters.
Obama fans jammed WGN's phone lines and sent in hundreds of protest e-mails. The message was clear to anyone who would follow Mr. Rosenberg's example. We will make trouble for you if you let anyone make the case against The One.
Other Obama supporters have threatened critics with criminal prosecution. In September, St. Louis County Circuit Attorney Bob McCulloch and St. Louis City Circuit Attorney Jennifer Joyce warned citizens that they would bring criminal libel prosecutions against anyone who made statements against Mr. Obama that were "false." I had been under the impression that the Alien and Sedition Acts had gone out of existence in 1801-'02. Not so, apparently, in metropolitan St. Louis. Similarly, the Obama campaign called for a criminal investigation of the American Issues Project when it ran ads highlighting Mr. Obama's ties to Mr. Ayers.
These attempts to shut down political speech have become routine for liberals. Congressional Democrats sought to reimpose the "fairness doctrine" on broadcasters, which until it was repealed in the 1980s required equal time for different points of view. The motive was plain: to shut down the one conservative-leaning communications medium, talk radio. Liberal talk-show hosts have mostly failed to draw audiences, and many liberals can't abide having citizens hear contrary views.
To their credit, some liberal old-timers - like House Appropriations Chairman David Obey - voted against the "fairness doctrine," in line with their longstanding support of free speech. But you can expect the "fairness doctrine" to get another vote if Barack Obama wins and Democrats increase their congressional majorities.
Corporate liberals have done their share in shutting down anti-liberal speech, too. "Saturday Night Live" ran a spoof of the financial crisis that skewered Democrats like House Financial Services Chairman Barney Frank and liberal contributors Herbert and Marion Sandler, who sold toxic-waste-filled Golden West to Wachovia Bank for $24 billion. Kind of surprising, but not for long. The tape of the broadcast disappeared from NBC's Web site and was replaced with another that omitted the references to Mr. Frank and the Sandlers. Evidently NBC and its parent, General Electric, don't want people to hear speech that attacks liberals.
Then there's the Democrats' "card check" legislation that would abolish secret ballot elections in determining whether employees are represented by unions. The unions' strategy is obvious: Send a few thugs over to employees' homes - we know where you live - and get them to sign cards that will trigger a union victory without giving employers a chance to be heard.
Once upon a time, liberals prided themselves, with considerable reason, as the staunchest defenders of free speech. Union organizers in the 1930s and 1940s made the case that they should have access to employees to speak freely to them, and union leaders like George Meany and Walter Reuther were ardent defenders of the First Amendment.
Today's liberals seem to be taking their marching orders from other quarters. Specifically, from the college and university campuses where administrators, armed with speech codes, have for years been disciplining and subjecting to sensitivity training any students who dare to utter thoughts that liberals find offensive. The campuses that once prided themselves as zones of free expression are now the least free part of our society.
Obama supporters who found the campuses congenial and Mr. Obama himself, who has chosen to live all his adult life in university communities, seem to find it entirely natural to suppress speech they don't like and seem utterly oblivious to claims this violates the letter and spirit of the First Amendment. In this campaign, we have seen the coming of the Obama thugocracy, suppressing free speech, and we may see its flourishing in the four or eight years ahead.
• Michael Barone is a nationally syndicated columnist.
Congressman's $121,000 Payoff to Alleged Mistress
Tim Mahoney Elected to Remove 'Ethical Cloud' of His Disgraced Predecessor, Mark Foley
By EMMA SCHWARTZ, RHONDA SCHWARTZ, and VIC WALTER
Oct. 13, 2008—
West Palm Beach Congressman Tim Mahoney (D-FL), whose predecessor resigned in the wake of a sex scandal, agreed to a $121,000 payment to a former mistress who worked on his staff and was threatening to sue him, according to current and former members of his staff who have been briefed on the settlement, which involved Mahoney and his campaign committee.
Mahoney, who is married, also promised the woman, Patricia Allen, a $50,000 a year job for two years at the agency that handles his campaign advertising, the staffers said.
A Mahoney spokesperson would not answer questions about the alleged affair or the settlement, but said Allen resigned of her own accord and "has not received any special payment from campaign funds."
Senior Democratic leaders in the House of Representatives, including Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-IL), the chair of the Democratic Caucus, have been working with Mahoney to keep the matter from hurting his re-election campaign, the Mahoney staffers said.
A spokesperson for Emanuel denies that account, but said Emanuel did confront Mahoney "upon hearing a rumor" about an affair in 2007 and "told him he was in public life and had a responsibility to act accordingly." The spokesperson added that it was a "private conversation" that had nothing to do with Mahoney's re-election prospects.
Emanuel's spokesperson said Emanual had not had any further contacts with Mahoney on the subject and did not know the woman involved worked on Mahoney's Congressional staff until informed by ABC News.
Mahoney was elected two years ago following the abrupt resignation of his disgraced predecessor, Republican Mark Foley, whose lewd internet messages to teenage boys and Congressional pages created a national outrage.
The affair between Mahoney and Allen began, according to the current and former staffers, in 2006 when Mahoney was campaigning for Congress against Foley, promising "a world that is safer, more moral."
Broken Campaign Promises?
At the time, Mahoney's campaign ads featured a picture of him with his wife, Terry, with the line, "Restoring America's Values Begins at Home."
The staffers say Mahoney first met Allen at a campaign stop and later arranged for her to work as a volunteer on the campaign. Allen also appeared in a Mahoney campaign television commercial, criticizing his opponent.
Following his election in 2006, Allen was hired, at taxpayers expense, to work on Mahoney's Congressional staff in Florida, at a yearly salary of $36,000.
After complaints about the affair circulated in Washington, Allen was moved to the campaign staff, the staffers say.
Friends of Allen told ABC News that Allen sought to break off the affair when she learned Mahoney was allegedly involved in other extra-marital relationships at the same time.
Her friends say she told them Mahoney threatened that ending the relationship could cost her the job.
"You work at my pleasure," Congressman Mahoney told Allen on a January 20, 2008 telephone call that was recorded and played for Mahoney staffers. ABC News was provided a copy. Click here to hear the tape.
"If you do the job that I think you should do, you get to keep your job. Whenever I don't feel like you're doing your job, then you lose your job," Mahoney can be heard telling Allen.
"And guess what? The only person that matters is guess who? Me. You understand that. That is how life really is. That is how it works," Mahoney says on the call.
"You're fired," Mahoney tells her. "Do you hear me? Don't tell me whether it's correct or not."
Allen says, "Tell me why else I'm fired."
"There is no why else," Mahoney responds.
Later, Allen says, "You're firing me for other reasons. You don't, you're not man enough to say it. So why don't you say it."
The portion of the tape provided to ABC News cuts off when the two begin a profanity-laced argument.
The Terms of the Settlement
After Allen was fired, the 50-year old single mother of two hired a lawyer, Gregory Coleman, and threatened to sue the Congressman for more than a million dollars.
Coleman, of the West Palm Beach firm Burman Critton Luttier & Coleman, also served as an attorney for former Congressman Foley. Calls to Coleman, and the lawyer for Mahoney, Gary Issacs, were not returned.
In a February letter to Mahoney, Coleman alleged sexual harassment, intimidation, humiliation and charged that the Congressman's behavior masked a "dark and depraved personality," according to people who have seen the letter.
Following a day-long mediation session in March, Mahoney agreed to a settlement, staffers said.
Mahoney reportedly insisted that Allen destroy all audio and video recordings of a sexual nature, they said.
Allen is also prohibited from working for Mahoney's opponent or any political candidate this election year, according to people familiar with the agreement.
In addition to the $61,000 payment, Mahoney agreed to pay $60,000 in legal fees to Allen's lawyer, they said.
The Former Mistress' Promise of a New Job?
The agreement between the Congressman and Allen, reportedly promises her a job for two years at Fletcher Rowley Chao Riddle or another company, beginning January 2009. Fletcher Rowley, a Nashville-based political consulting firm that offers "crisis management and creative strategy," lists Mahoney's 2006 election victory as one of its "success stories," according to its website.
The firm's CEO, Bill Fletcher, strongly denied any knowledge of the settlement or any promise of employment to Allen. "I know nothing of the like," he told ABC News. "There is no such agreement. There is no arrangement," Fletcher said.
According to Fletcher, all funds paid to his company by the Mahoney for Congress campaign were properly accounted for. "I've made no payments to any third party," he said.
According to people briefed on the settlement Allen was promised at least $50,000 a year or other employment if the Fletcher Rowley job fell through.
Friends of Allen say she was required to sign a back-dated letter of resignation to the campaign chairman, Charles Halloran, describing her departure as "amicable" and "nothing to do with you, the Congressman, the campaign, or any conduct by anyone associated with your congressional office of campaign."
A Mahoney campaign spokesman said, "Patricia Allen resigned of her own accord, in good standing."
The spokesman said there "was no sexual harassment suit filed against Congressman Mahoney."
Allen, reached at her home in Hobe Sound, said she was "unable" to comment publicly.
Her friends say her settlement agreement with Mahoney prohibits her from making "negative comments" about him.
WOW I couldn't agree more. Get off your ass, kick people off unemployment/welfare, and throw some CEO's in jail and we should be good!
So true!
Ford, After Almost 3 Decades as Investor, May Sell Mazda Stake
By Bill Koenig
Oct. 12 (Bloomberg) -- Ford Motor Co., after almost three decades as an investor in Japan's Mazda Motor Corp., is considering selling its controlling stake, a person familiar with the deliberations said.
A sale of the one-third holding in Mazda isn't certain, said the person, who asked not to be identified because no decision has been made. ``We do not want to comment on speculation,'' Dearborn, Michigan-based Ford said yesterday in a statement.
Unloading the stake would end an era in which the second- largest U.S. automaker used Mazda to help groom executives including its incoming finance chief and its current head of North American operations. Ford faces a mounting cash drain as the U.S. auto market sinks to the lowest levels since 1991.
``Everything needs to be looked at in the current situation,'' said Dennis Virag, president of Automotive Consulting Group in Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Based on the Oct. 10 closing share price in Tokyo, Ford's Mazda holding was valued at $1.36 billion. Ford has lost $23.9 billion since the end of 2005. Last month's 35 percent slide in U.S. sales outpaced the 27 percent industry drop as the credit crisis damped auto demand, especially for the pickups and sport- utility vehicles that provided most of Ford's 1990s profits.
The possible sale was reported yesterday by Nikkei English News and state-run Japanese broadcaster NHK. Hiroshima, Japan- based Mazda said it had nothing to announce, according to a statement.
`No Role'
``It does make sense to sell off Mazda,'' Virag said. ``Mazda has no role in Ford's strategic plan.''
Under Chief Executive Officer Alan Mulally, Ford is emphasizing unifying its own regional units as it tries to end losses.
The automaker's European division with its small-car models ``basically replaces the role Mazda played,'' said David Cole, chairman of the Center for Automotive Research in Ann Arbor.
Ford formed an automatic-transmission joint venture with Mazda in 1969 and acquired a 25 percent stake in Japan's fourth- largest automaker in 1979. Ford expanded the holding to 33.4 percent in 1996, giving it effective control.
A sale would extend Ford's moves to shed assets outside the U.S., including U.K.-based automakers Jaguar and Land Rover, as Mulally focuses on shoring up the automaker's money-losing North American operations. He faces a balancing act to ensure that Ford has enough cash to weather the sales slump while still developing new models.
Ford's Cash
Ford had automotive cash of $26.6 billion as of June 30, after borrowing $23.4 billion in late 2006 by pledging collateral such as its headquarters building, factories and trademarks.
After targeting 2009 for a return to profit, Ford withdrew that goal in May and hasn't set a new one. The company's second- quarter loss was a record $8.7 billion. Ford fell 9 cents to $1.99, a 26-year low, in New York Stock Exchange composite trading on Oct. 10.
As part of Mulally's push to diversify Ford's product lineup at lower costs, Ford is planning to merge its Mazda6- based Fusion platform and its European Mondeo sedan platform starting in 2010.
Also last month, Mazda said it is switching to a unit of JPMorgan Chase & Co. as the main source of U.S. financing for its vehicles from Ford's in-house lending arm. Chase Auto Finance Corp. will be the primary provider of loans and leases starting Oct. 16. Ford and Mazda said the move was a joint decision.
Factories, Executives
Ford and Mazda jointly own factories in the U.S. and Asia, including a Flat Rock, Michigan, plant that produces the Mazda6 and Mustang.
Ford has used postings at Mazda to help broaden managers' experience, including Lewis Booth, whose promotion to chief financial officer was announced Oct. 10, and Executive Vice President Mark Fields, who leads Ford's North American operations.
Mazda platforms and major structural parts also have been adopted as the basis for Ford models including the Fusion midsize sedan, based off the Mazda6.
After Mazda shares tumbled 48 percent this year, Ford may want to hold off on a sale until stock prices improve, said Maryann Keller, an independent auto analyst and consultant in Greenwich, Connecticut.
``This isn't the time to sell,'' Keller said. ``Ford would not get the fair value for that business.''
To contact the reporter on this story: Bill Koenig in Southfield, Michigan, at wkoenig@bloomberg.net
"up to" being the key words there...
BDRR - Life changer in the making.
Have you talked to the CPA recently?
Get your Free Second Amendment Guide...
https://www.nrahq.org/beckoffer/Default.asp
In the course of history, we have set many nations free, and it has always carried with it a price. Freedom is always worth the price!
Scary...
Made my ass pucker that's for sure...
In the course of history, we have set many nations free, and it has always carried with it a price. Freedom is always worth the price!
Your winning, logical, reasoned arguments
1. Sarah Palin is actually very bright. In fact, during the debate, according to the "Global Language Monitor", Palin spoke at a 10th grade level, Joe Biden...only 8th grade.
2. Yeah, troop levels have come way down, but they are slightly higher than pre-surge. I guess you didn't mind Joe Biden's flat out lie that McCain "voted the exact same way" as Obama on the budget bill that contained an increase on singles making as little as $42,000 a year? He didn't. He voted the same way as Obama on an amendment to that bill, which didn't have anything to do with increasing taxes.
3. There again, you have a point. Obama actually voted for higher taxes on single individuals making as little as $42,000. Also during that debate though, "average" Joe did challenge us to go with him "down to Katie's Restaurant on Union Street in Wilmington or walk into Home Depot", where he spent a lot of time, and ask anyone there about George Bush's administration. Except, that would be really hard to do without a "flux capacitor" and a Delorean to travel back in time with. Katie's went out of business 25-30 years ago. You might still be able to go to Home Depot with Joe and help him pick up a wrench for the plumbing repairs I'm sure he often handles after that long train ride home he talks about all the time.
4. Her foreign policy experience is limited...but so is OBAMA's...and HE, is applying for President. At least she didn't say she would meet with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad without preconditions, and then lie about it, and then have her running mate lie about it. Biden also said that the U.S. spends more in Iraq in one month than it has in Afghanistan in six or seven years. He was only off by 2000 percent. And remember this line? "President Bush insisted on elections in the West Bank, when I said, and others said, and Barack Obama said, 'Big mistake. Hamas will win. You'll legitimize them.'" The fact is, Obama had only been in office a few days when the election took place, and there is absolutely no public record of Obama having said that. But maybe he said it to William Ayers, quietly in his ear, as they sat in a pew at Trinity United Church together, listening to Jeremiah Wright attack America?
5. Well, you got me there, she sure did. Moscow, Idaho. Where the University of Idaho is located.
Your winning, logical, reasoned arguments
1. Sarah Palin is actually very bright. In fact, during the debate, according to the "Global Language Monitor", Palin spoke at a 10th grade level, Joe Biden...only 8th grade.
2. Yeah, troop levels have come way down, but they are slightly higher than pre-surge. I guess you didn't mind Joe Biden's flat out lie that McCain "voted the exact same way" as Obama on the budget bill that contained an increase on singles making as little as $42,000 a year? He didn't. He voted the same way as Obama on an amendment to that bill, which didn't have anything to do with increasing taxes.
3. There again, you have a point. Obama actually voted for higher taxes on single individuals making as little as $42,000. Also during that debate though, "average" Joe did challenge us to go with him "down to Katie's Restaurant on Union Street in Wilmington or walk into Home Depot", where he spent a lot of time, and ask anyone there about George Bush's administration. Except, that would be really hard to do without a "flux capacitor" and a Delorean to travel back in time with. Katie's went out of business 25-30 years ago. You might still be able to go to Home Depot with Joe and help him pick up a wrench for the plumbing repairs I'm sure he often handles after that long train ride home he talks about all the time.
4. Her foreign policy experience is limited...but so is OBAMA's...and HE, is applying for President. At least she didn't say she would meet with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad without preconditions, and then lie about it, and then have her running mate lie about it. Biden also said that the U.S. spends more in Iraq in one month than it has in Afghanistan in six or seven years. He was only off by 2000 percent. And remember this line? "President Bush insisted on elections in the West Bank, when I said, and others said, and Barack Obama said, 'Big mistake. Hamas will win. You'll legitimize them.'" The fact is, Obama had only been in office a few days when the election took place, and there is absolutely no public record of Obama having said that. But maybe he said it to William Ayers, quietly in his ear, as they sat in a pew at Trinity United Church together, listening to Jeremiah Wright attack America?
5. Well, you got me there, she sure did. Moscow, Idaho. Where the University of Idaho is located.
The Obama National Anthem
http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/16200/
The Obama National Anthem
http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/16200/
The Obama National Anthem
http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/16200/
They are too busy planning the victory celebration....
Dem Congress plans on Obama win...
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20081011/D93OHKO80.html
If employers feel the need to pay people more then more power to them.
Yes I think the same tax rate is fair for everyone. How could that be anything but fair? Should we charge two different prices for a gallon of gas? One for someone making $50k and another for the guy who makes $150K?
As the Economy Sinks, So Do Odds of a Tax Cut
Thursday October 9, 6:15 pm ET
By Rick Newman
One of the riskiest financial moves you make this year could be listening to the presidential candidates--and banking on a tax cut after the November elections.
John McCain and Barack Obama both promise that widespread tax cuts will be one major way they'll revive the economy and help lift consumers' sagging spirits. They differ, of course, on who should enjoy the largesse. McCain wants to cut estate and corporate income taxes, and extend broad-based tax cuts that were enacted earlier this decade. Obama agrees about extending some of those Bush era tax cuts, while offering lots of other relief to people earning less than $250,000 and raising taxes on the wealthy.
But here's what you're not likely to hear either candidate say before Election Day on November 4: There's no money left for tax cuts. And a slumping economy--now almost certainly in recession--will make it hard to pass tax cuts for the next couple of years, and maybe longer.
One obvious reason is the huge, unexpected bill for bailing out banks and other firms saddled with bad debts. All told, the government has committed more than $1 trillion in public funds to help the financial sector get back on its feet. That's more than one third of the government's entire budget in a given year. The feds (and the taxpayers) might get some of the money back--but nobody will know for years.
Meanwhile, the Congressional Budget Office recently took a much gloomier view of the future, casting a cloud over both candidates' tax-cut plans. For most of the year, CBO had been projecting that government revenues would be more or less in line with spending over the next 10 years. But with the economy spiraling into recession, CBO now projects that the government will spend $2.3 trillion more than it brings in over the next decade. And that's before accounting for any bailout costs.
Such huge deficits will make it hard for Congress to justify any additional funding for tax cuts. "The next president is going to be strongly tied by what's happened over the last year," says Tom Cooley, dean of New York University's Stern School of Business. "It's dubious that any of these tax-cut plans will get through."
Here are the prospects for a variety of scenarios:
If McCain gets elected. The estimated cost of McCain's tax cuts over five years is $1.48 trillion, according to the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center. The most costly part of McCain's plan would be the permanent extension of the Bush tax cuts from 2001 and 2003, which lowered taxes for most Americans. Those extensions would amount to $585 billion of lost government revenue, compared to letting tax rates go back to their earlier levels. And if there's any good news for taxpayers, it's that most of the Bush tax cuts are likely to stay in place, regardless of who wins in November. "Resetting them would amount to raising taxes when the economy is not doing so well," says Roberton Williams of the Tax Policy Center. "That harkens back to Herbert Hoover and the Great Depression." If the Bush cuts do become permanent, most workers won't notice--their paychecks will stay the same.
McCain's other ideas--like lowering the estate tax and making other changes in the tax code that would favor higher earners--would probably meet a tough audience in Congress. By most projections, both houses of Congress will remain in Democratic hands, and there won't be much of a welcome mat for a Republican president hoping to lower taxes on the wealthy.
If Obama gets elected. The estimated cost of Obama's tax cuts over five years is $967 billion, according to the Tax Policy Center. Obama also favors the extension of many of the Bush tax cuts, though he'd repeal some that benefit higher earners. In addition, Obama frequently says that under his plan, many people who earn less than $250,000 will pay lower taxes through a variety of credits that target groups like working parents with kids and seniors who make less than $50,000.
The problem with Obama's plan is that once it gets to Congress, choosing from a long list of targeted tax credits would fuel bitter fights over who deserves help and who doesn't. Even with Democrats in charge on Capitol Hill, there are fiscal conservatives in both parties sure to oppose the passage of Obama's expensive tax cuts in full. And some of his ideas--like rebates for people who don't even earn enough to pay taxes--are controversial even among Democrats.
With the economy rapidly deteriorating in the last months of the campaign, some analysts foresee the next president holding a 21st century fireside chat to explain the dire reality to his fellow Americans. "He could say, 'The economic situation is a lot worse than I expected, and we're going to have to put this off,' " predicts Williams of the Tax Policy Center. "Nobody's going to say that in the campaign, but I think that will be the first speech either one of them gives in office." That would still leave time for the next president to cut taxes later in his first term--allowing him to save face and still say he fulfilled his tax-cut promises.
No matter who gets elected, a second stimulus plan is starting to look more plausible than a quick round of permanent tax cuts. Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has already called for a second set of rebate checks to be sent to consumers, matching the $150 billion worth of checks sent out earlier this year. That won't happen before the election, because Congress isn't in session, but it could happen right afterward, even before the next president takes the oath in January. Pelosi's plan coincides with a smaller stimulus plan that Obama is calling for, and McCain, like Obama, favored the first stimulus plan. So, it's plausible that instead of tax cuts, many Americans could find another $600 or $1,200 check in their mailboxes sometime next spring.
If there are no meaningful tax cuts, then the wealthy could be the unintended beneficiaries of Washington's red ink, at least for a while. If there are no middle-class tax cuts, then there's no need to raise taxes on the wealthy in order to pay for them, as Obama's plan calls for. Obama, if elected, could still burnish his populist credentials by calling for some sort of tax hike on corporations or the top 1 percent of earners. But odds are he'd get shouted down. In the midst of a scary recession, many economists have already been pointing out the devastating effects of Herbert Hoover's 1932 tax increases, widely blamed for deepening the Depression. By next January, the economy will be scary enough. No president will want to risk making it worse.
Why is it always the politicians (during an election year) and the poor lazy live of the government folks who want to see a redistribution of wealth? You make it and you should get to keep it. Hell I think we learned that in first grade!
I figured!
Why don't we just tax everyone the same %....That would be fair!
Are you a socialist?
Your a funny guy...Shouldn't it cut both ways?
The Marxist Roots of Black Liberation Theology
by Anthony B. Bradley
What is Black Liberation Theology anyway? Barack Obama's former pastor, Jeremiah Wright catapulted black liberation theology onto a national stage, when America discovered Trinity United Church of Christ. Understanding the background of the movement might give better clarity into Wright's recent vitriolic preaching. A clear definition of black theology was first given formulation in 1969 by the National Committee of Black Church Men in the midst of the civil-rights movement:
Black theology is a theology of black liberation. It seeks to plumb the black condition in the light of God's revelation in Jesus Christ, so that the black community can see that the gospel is commensurate with the achievements of black humanity. Black theology is a theology of 'blackness.' It is the affirmation of black humanity that emancipates black people from White racism, thus providing authentic freedom for both white and black people. It affirms the humanity of white people in that it says 'No' to the encroachment of white oppression.
In the 1960s, black churches began to focus their attention beyond helping blacks cope with national racial discrimination particularly in urban areas.
The notion of "blackness" is not merely a reference to skin color, but rather is a symbol of oppression that can be applied to all persons of color who have a history of oppression (except whites, of course). So in this sense, as Wright notes, "Jesus was a poor black man" because he lived in oppression at the hands of "rich white people." The overall emphasis of Black Liberation Theology is the black struggle for liberation from various forms of "white racism" and oppression.
James Cone, the chief architect of Black Liberation Theology in his book A Black Theology of Liberation (1970), develops black theology as a system. In this new formulation, Christian theology is a theology of liberation -- "a rational study of the being of God in the world in light of the existential situation of an oppressed community, relating the forces of liberation to the essence of the gospel, which is Jesus Christ," writes Cone. Black consciousness and the black experience of oppression orient black liberation theology -- i.e., one of victimization from white oppression.
One of the tasks of black theology, says Cone, is to analyze the nature of the gospel of Jesus Christ in light of the experience of oppressed blacks. For Cone, no theology is Christian theology unless it arises from oppressed communities and interprets Jesus' work as that of liberation. Christian theology is understood in terms of systemic and structural relationships between two main groups: victims (the oppressed) and victimizers (oppressors). In Cone's context, writing in the late 1960s and early 1970s, the great event of Christ's liberation was freeing African Americans from the centuries-old tyranny of white racism and white oppression.
American white theology, which Cone never clearly defines, is charged with having failed to help blacks in the struggle for liberation. Black theology exists because "white religionists" failed to relate the gospel of Jesus to the pain of being black in a white racist society.
For black theologians, white Americans do not have the ability to recognize the humanity in persons of color, blacks need their own theology to affirm their identity in terms of a reality that is anti-black -- “blackness” stands for all victims of white oppression. "White theology," when formed in isolation from the black experience, becomes a theology of white oppressors, serving as divine sanction from criminal acts committed against blacks. Cone argues that even those white theologians who try to connect theology to black suffering rarely utter a word that is relevant to the black experience in America. White theology is not Christian theology at all. There is but one guiding principle of black theology: an unqualified commitment to the black community as that community seeks to define its existence in the light of God's liberating work in the world.
As such, black theology is a survival theology because it helps blacks navigate white dominance in American culture. In Cone's view, whites consider blacks animals, outside of the realm of humanity, and attempted to destroy black identity through racial assimilation and integration programs--as if blacks have no legitimate existence apart from whiteness. Black theology is the theological expression of a people deprived of social and political power. God is not the God of white religion but the God of black existence. In Cone's understanding, truth is not objective but subjective -- a personal experience of the Ultimate in the midst of degradation.
The echoes of Cone's theology bleed through the now infamous, anti-Hilary excerpt by Rev. Wright. Clinton is among the oppressing class ("rich white people") and is incapable of understanding oppression ("ain't never been called a n-gg-r") but Jesus knows what it was like because he was "a poor black man" oppressed by "rich white people." While Black Liberation Theology is not main stream in most black churches, many pastors in Wright's generation are burdened by Cone's categories which laid the foundation for many to embrace Marxism and a distorted self-image of the perpetual "victim."
Black Liberation Theology as Marxist Victimology
Black Liberation Theology actually encourages a victim mentality among blacks. John McWhorters' book Losing the Race, will be helpful here. Victimology, says McWhorter, is the adoption of victimhood as the core of one's identity -- for example, like one who suffers through living in "a country and who lived in a culture controlled by rich white people." It is a subconscious, culturally inherited affirmation that life for blacks in America has been in the past and will be in the future a life of being victimized by the oppression of whites. In today's terms, it is the conviction that, 40 years after the Civil Rights Act, conditions for blacks have not substantially changed. As Wright intimates, for example, scores of black men regularly get passed over by cab drivers.
Reducing black identity to "victimhood" distorts the reality of true progress. For example, was Obama a victim of widespread racial oppression at the hand of "rich white people" before graduating from Columbia University, Harvard Law School magna cum laude, or after he acquired his estimated net worth of $1.3 million? How did "rich white people" keep Obama from succeeding? If Obama is the model of an oppressed black man, I want to be oppressed next! With my graduate school debt my net worth is literally negative $52,659.
The overall result, says McWhorter, is that "the remnants of discrimination hold an obsessive indignant fascination that allows only passing acknowledgement of any signs of progress." Jeremiah Wright, infused with victimology, wielded self-righteous indignation in the service of exposing the inadequacies Hilary Clinton's world of "rich white people." The perpetual creation of a racial identity born out of self-loathing and anxiety often spends more time inventing reasons to cry racism than working toward changing social mores, and often inhibits movement toward reconciliation and positive mobility.
McWhorter articulates three main objections to victimology: First, victimology condones weakness in failure. Victimology tacitly stamps approval on failure, lack of effort, and criminality. Behaviors and patterns that are self-destructive are often approved of as cultural or presented as unpreventable consequences from previous systemic patterns. Black Liberation theologians are clear on this point: "People are poor because they are victims of others," says Dr. Dwight Hopkins, a Black Liberation theologian teaching at the University of Chicago Divinity School.
Second, victimology hampers progress because, from the outset, it focuses attention on obstacles. For example, in Black liberation Theology, the focus is on the impediment of black freedom in light of the Goliath of white racism.
Third, victimology keeps racism alive because many whites are constantly painted as racist with no evidence provided. Racism charges create a context for backlash and resentment fueling new attitudes among whites not previously held or articulated, and creates "separatism" -- a suspension of moral judgment in the name of racial solidarity. Does Jeremiah Wright foster separatism or racial unity and reconciliation?
For Black Liberation theologians, Sunday is uniquely tied to redefining their sense of being human within a context of marginalization. "Black people who have been humiliated and oppressed by the structures of White society six days of the week gather together each Sunday morning in order to experience another definition of their humanity," says James Cone in his book Speaking the Truth (1999).
Many black theologians believe that both racism and socio-economic oppression continue to augment the fragmentation between whites and blacks. Historically speaking, it makes sense that black theologians would struggle with conceptualizing social justice and the problem of evil as it relates to the history of colonialism and slavery in the Americas.
Is Black Liberation Theology helping? Wright's liberation theology has stirred up resentment, backlash, Obama defections, separatism, white guilt, caricature, and offense. Preaching to a congregation of middle-class blacks about their victim identity invites a distorted view of reality, fosters nihilism, and divides rather than unites.
Black Liberation Is Marxist Liberation
One of the pillars of Obama's home church, Trinity United Church of Christ, is "economic parity." On the website, Trinity claims that God is not pleased with "America's economic mal-distribution." Among all of controversial comments by Jeremiah Wright, the idea of massive wealth redistribution is the most alarming. The code language "economic parity" and references to "mal-distribution" is nothing more than channeling the twisted economic views of Karl Marx. Black Liberation theologians have explicitly stated a preference for Marxism as an ethical framework for the black church because Marxist thought is predicated on a system of oppressor class (whites) versus victim class (blacks).
Black Liberation theologians James Cone and Cornel West have worked diligently to embed Marxist thought into the black church since the 1970s. For Cone, Marxism best addressed remedies to the condition of blacks as victims of white oppression. In For My People, Cone explains that "the Christian faith does not possess in its nature the means for analyzing the structure of capitalism. Marxism as a tool of social analysis can disclose the gap between appearance and reality, and thereby help Christians to see how things really are."
In God of the Oppressed, Cone said that Marx's chief contribution is "his disclosure of the ideological character of bourgeois thought, indicating the connections between the 'ruling material force of society' and the 'ruling intellectual' force." Marx's thought is useful and attractive to Cone because it allows black theologians to critique racism in America on the basis of power and revolution.
For Cone, integrating Marx into black theology helps theologians see just how much social perceptions determine theological questions and conclusions. Moreover, these questions and answers are "largely a reflection of the material condition of a given society."
In 1979, Cornel West offered a critical integration of Marxism and black theology in his essay, "Black Theology and Marxist Thought" because of the shared human experience of oppressed peoples as victims. West sees a strong correlation between black theology and Marxist thought because "both focus on the plight of the exploited, oppressed and degraded peoples of the world, their relative powerlessness and possible empowerment." This common focus prompts West to call for "a serious dialogue between Black theologians and Marxist thinkers" -- a dialogue that centers on the possibility of "mutually arrived-at political action."
In his book Prophesy Deliverance, West believes that by working together, Marxists and black theologians can spearhead much-needed social change for those who are victims of oppression. He appreciates Marxism for its "notions of class struggle, social contradictions, historical specificity, and dialectical developments in history" that explain the role of power and wealth in bourgeois capitalist societies. A common perspective among Marxist thinkers is that bourgeois capitalism creates and perpetuates ruling-class domination -- which, for black theologians in America, means the domination and victimization of blacks by whites. America has been over run by "White racism within mainstream establishment churches and religious agencies," writes West.
Perhaps it is the Marxism imbedded in Obama's attendance at Trinity Church that should raise red flags. "Economic parity" and "distribution" language implies things like government-coerced wealth redistribution, perpetual minimum wage increases, government subsidized health care for all, and the like. One of the priorities listed on Obama's campaign website reads, "Obama will protect tax cuts for poor and middle class families, but he will reverse most of the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest taxpayers."
Black Liberation Theology, originally intended to help the black community, may have actually hurt many blacks by promoting racial tension, victimology, and Marxism which ultimately leads to more oppression. As the failed "War on Poverty" has exposed, the best way to keep the blacks perpetually enslaved to government as "daddy" is to preach victimology, Marxism, and to seduce blacks into thinking that upward mobility is someone else's responsibility in a free society.
Anthony B. Bradley is a research fellow at the Acton Institute, and assistant professor of theology at Covenant Theological Seminary in St. Louis. His Ph.D. dissertation is titled, "Victimology in Black Liberation Theology." This article was originally published on the newsletter of the Glen Beck Program. Watch Bradley’s guest appearance on Beck’s CNN Headline News show here.
A must watch before voting...
http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/video.aspx?RsrcID=2036
What just happened?
"Clinton is placing much, not all,"
Well you could be right maybe I read this wrong? The interview on ABC was wrong?
Bill Clinton Says Democrats Resisted Standards For Fannie Mae And Freddie Mac
NewsBusters caught a segment from a video shown over at ABC's Political Radar in an article titled "Bill Clinton: Don't 'Overly Parse' McCain Request to Delay Debate," and within the video embedded at the article, at the 2 minute 45 second mark in the discussion dealing with the economy, ABC's Chris Cuomo asked Bill Clinton if Nancy Pelosi's recent statements were "playing politics," and Bill Clinton's answer has taken many by surprise.
Chris Cuomo, ABC News: A little surprising for you to hear the Democrats saying, "This came out of nowhere, this is all about the Republicans. We had nothing to do with this." Nancy Pelosi saying it. She signed the '99 Gramm Bill. She knew what was going on with the SEC. They're all sophisticated people. Is that playing politics in this situation?
Bill Clinton: Well, maybe everybody does that a little bit. I think the responsibility the Democrats have may rest more in resisting any efforts by Republicans in the Congress or by me when I was President to put some standards and tighten up a little on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
It is no surprise that Clinton would give his opinion on the economic crisis facing us today, even to the point of telling people not to read to much into John McCain's suggestion about postponing the first of the presidential debates on Friday, saying "We know he didn't do it because he's afraid because Sen. McCain wanted more debates," he continued on to say "You can put it off a few days the problem is it's hard to reschedule those things. I presume he did that in good faith since I know he wanted -- I remember he asked for more debates to go all around the country and so I don't think we ought to overly parse that."
His comments about McCain and the debates might not have been overly surprising, but what has caught many people's attention is how Clinton is placing much, not all, of the blame for the financial crisis on Democrats, especially this close to the presidential election.
Evidence of this surprise can be found on liberal blogs and forums across the web, such as Taylor Marsh, who was once known as the hub for anything Hillary, then went on to support Barack Obama after Hillary suspended her campaign.
Marsh says :
WJC is truly testing my patience. There's no doubt he doesn't need to get nasty or partisan, you know, like the old Bill of the 1990s who went on to win two general elections, plus beat off the wingnuts handily. But he could at least choose to quit pontificating and serving up quotes that actually aid the other side. It certainly doesn't help Hillary with the activist base and Obama supporters; you know, those people Bill knows she'll need if this election doesn't turn out so well. Just read some of the comments he's getting from Dems across the web that is beginning to blow back on Hillary, which is what matters to me. Hillary has been nothing but stalwart in her work for Obama. So I'm done biting my tongue, especially after hearing WJC played back on Rush today, who riffed, then dissed the debates, which was *!@&ing infuriating.
Another point about Bill Clinton was his praise for John McCain when he introduced him to speak at the Clinton Global Initiative this morning as shown by Fox.
Clinton's statement:
I want to say one thing in particular about John McCain in bringing him out here. When most people in his party were thinking that global warming was overstated and maybe even admit designed to let people like me who love solar and wind get into it. He decided to look into it and everyone of us by the way with every thorny problem we face need to be in the looking into it business and he and the Junior Senator from New York, with whom I have a passing acquaintance took 2 astonishing trips. One to your state to the point barrel of Alaska, the northern most community in the United States,” Clinton said referring to Palin, “where the Eskimos told them they thought their way of life was coming to an end because of changes in the climate and one to the northern most settlement on Planer Earth. It’s on an island 600 miles north of Norway above the Arctic Circle where they study the changes in the planet where there were signs on their cabin don’t go out at night without a gun or a light or the polar bears will eat you.”
Clinton went on to say "The point I want to make is there were any votes on this in Arizona. He just wanted to know and they dragged along some very skeptical Republican senators who now are prepared to vote for some kind of bipartisan legislation which will put America in a position to be a part of what is coming up by 2010 which is figuring out where we go next in the struggle against climate change. That’s what we want from everybody. We want some of us to be on the left, some of us to be on the right but all of us to want to know. John McCain wants to know and I am profoundly grateful to him coming here today.”
LA Times Top of the Ticket, describes Clinton's words about Obama's speaking to the group later by satellite feed from Florida, was "less warm" and they think Clinton is "hedging his bets," in the race for presidency between Barack Obama and John McCain.
The liberal blogosphere is not very happy with that tidbit of news either as evidenced by progressive sites all over the web.
Yglesias at Think Progress is dripping with sarcasm when he says "It sure was nice of Bill Clinton to put important national concerns above petty partisanship by agreeing to host a John McCain campaign speech and help the GOP nominee burnish his bipartisan credentials."
Lawyers, Guns & Money, believes Bill Clintons behavior is "an absolute disgrace."
The New Republics' The Plank is calling Clinton "The Underminer."
Those are just reactions from the left.
With Clinton's recent appearances on The View and elsewhere, to which Obama supporters have been overtly criticizing him for lavishing praise on Sarah Palin and highlighting his extreme affection and admiration for John McCain at every turn, this all begs the question, has Bill Clinton changed his party affiliation and we just missed the news?
http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/260301
In the course of history, we have set many nations free, and it has always carried with it a price. Freedom is always worth the price!
The financial mess we are in all started with the housing mess that started with Freddy/Fanie...Can't dispute that! Even Slick Willy admitted that. He was even quick enough to see that in between hummers...
Spread this around. Everyone should have to read this before theu vote...
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=28973
I was less interested in how that poster said that then I was interested in the message. Everyone should read that letter before voting. Kills me how the media failed once again to shine a light on this issue.
God have mercy on us!
Another written evidence the 'party of death' Democrats corrupted Fann & Fredd and ran it to the ground.
Pray that these evidence will be heard, read and understood by those voting in Nov 4, 2008. Pray fervently for wisdom and mercy!
Oct 10, 2008 @ 06:16 PMate mely, middletown
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=28973
LOL That will make a great movie...
OK so whats the deal?
Damn! Would have thought this was the end for shorty and we would all be getting a check soon.
Yep it was all part of the plan...
Are we rich yet?