Jon Stewart and Wyatt Cenac Slam Chris Matthews

Hat Tip: Hot Air

Black Jesus Has Come

I had often joked about how moonbats had elevated Barack Obama to the status of god. Well the Dutch have really gone the extra mile. A Dutch newspaper actually depicts Obama as God.

But the picture in free newspaper De Pers probably best sums up the mammoth expectations of the world on President Obama's shoulders. It prints a rendition of Raphael's The Transfiguration with the first black US president depicted as Jesus, flanked by two prophets, the clouds looming behind him lit up. The headline reads "Black Jesus has come".

True feelings or paper selling hype? I thought the latter until I read a little farther.

The Dutch Crown Prince Willem-Alexander told a press conference in Dubai that the inauguration of Barack Obama was "probably more important than the release of Nelson Mandela".

The election of the United States' first black President was monumental but I seriously doubt President Obama faced the persecution Nelson Mandela did. I get the feeling that there are a great many people whose grasp of reality is tenuous at best.

In closing I would like to treat everyone to this video;Hope and Change Fulfilled from the good folks at The Nose On Your Face

Dane Bramage the Hater Checking In

I got an intersting comment to my post election post.  Anonymous said...

Hurray, in spite of you haters out there, you are missing the historic significance. It was time for the birth of this social and political change in this country.You can't stop a birth. Sorry that you feel the way you do about the rest of your family. Maybe they recognize something more profound that you refuse to realize.How would your grandparents or your great-granparents feel about last night's
historic moment. Your G-Ma was born in the 1800's without the right to vote, and was double-discriminated against because she was born on a reservation.Stop drinking Haterade!

Yea! Yea! Black man is President! We've come along way baby! There. Significance duly noted.

Funny how I'm a hater because I oppose Obama. I don't oppose him because he is black. I oppose him because he supports abortion, he's inexperienced, and he is a tax and spend democrat. My family wasn't voting to make history. My family is mostly clueless, well my sister is clueless (he he). My family voted for Obama because he is black. I'm sorry but I got past the man's color on day one and evaluated the content of his character. Needless to say I found him wanting. If you voted for him because he's black or because you somehow felt this country had to prove something by electing a black president then you put him in office for the wrong reasons. Yeah Grandma had it tough, but those days are gone. Change has come and believe it or not the agents of change were not liberal Democrats. If you had bothered to listen to McCain's concession speech, you would have heard him mention how outraged people were when Teddy Roosevelt invited Booker T. Washington to the White House. The loudest objectors? Segregationalists all of whom were Democrats.

The historical significance is not lost on me. It was greatly diminished because it was so politicized. The nature of partisan politics has the Democrats breaking their arms patting themselves on the back as if they had some great hand in bringing this about. They didn't.

Historically Democrats have always opposed better race relations. They don't mention the contribution of Republicans to making Barak's moment possible. You know, men like Hiram Revels, the first black man elected Senator (of Mississippi no less) and a Republican. Your boy Barak would never had been heard of if Hiram hadn't paved the way. Democrats tried to block Hiram's entry into the senate. Nor have I forgotten that the staunchest opponents to Civil rights were Democrats.

Sure Barack can have his moment in history but it would have happened without him eventually. He should consider himself blessed to have been chosen but I suspect he is too full of himself and his "historical significance" to give credit where credit is due. And in January, when he starts his job as President of the United States, we will see if he is worthy of this historical honor. It would be a shame if the most significant thing of the Obama Presidency was the fact that he was credited with being the first black POTUS.

Blogged with the Flock Browser

Cracks Appear in the Obamalith Base

Poll shows McCain in 5-point lead over Obama

After being ahead most of the summer, Barack Obama's lead in the polls has evaporated. John McCain has a 5 point lead according to a Zogby poll. What could be happening to the Obamassiah's credibility? Hmmm, could be that all the policy reversals he's been going through.

"That hairline difference between nuance and what appears to be flip-flopping is hurting him with liberal voters," Zogby said.

I love how liberals think that reversing your position occasionally is considered "nuanced" but too much is flip-flopping.  So who is jumping the Obama ship? No one group in particular. I seems his support is eroding across all his followers.

The dip in support for Obama, who would be the first black U.S. president, cut across demographic and ideological lines. He slipped among Catholics, born-again Christians, women, independents and younger voters. He retained the support of more than 90 percent of black voters.

I have made it no secret that I do NOT support Obama nor will I vote for him. I do challenge my fellow African Americans to explain to me what it is exactly that Obama offers as a black candidate.  I mean aside from the historical footnote of being the first black POTUS, do the 90% of blacks that support Obama think that once he is in office, he's going to usher in some new age of black prosperity? Is he going to throw open the governmental coffers and pay every black person for all the persecution suffered at the hands of "Mr. Charlie" all those years?  Why would you support an absolute novice based solely on race? Inquiring minds want to know.

Blogged with the Flock Browser

An Obama Nation

(Hat Tip: Stop the ACLU)

Testimony

When I imagined myself as the first black man to run for President, I always considered my Christian testimony and the part my pastor would play in it. I could not think of kicking him to the curb or ignoring my association with him. As a fundamental Baptist preacher he is prone to say controversial things from the pulpit. Controversial to the ears of the world but not to God. The world might think it hateful when he preaches on sanctification and separation especially when he says to remain separate from worldly influences. My pastor always preaches the Word. If he talks about political issues, it is from a spiritual point of view and based on scripture, not personal opinion. My political views are shaped by my faith and my faith is shaped by the preaching and teaching of God’s Word and God’s Word is presented by my preacher. It was his ministry that led me to Christ and it was under his ministry that I grew as a Christian. So I cannot conceive of any time or situation where I would distance myself from him or his teachings and comments.

Well I probably won’t ever run for President but Obama is trying hard to. So I wonder about what his testimony is. He obviously embraced his pastor and his teachings at one point. But now he is putting as much distance as he can between himself and Reverend Wright. Why? Does he or doesn’t he believe the man? Is Wright Obama’s spiritual leader or isn’t he? If not then who? Shouldn’t we get to know who is the spiritual guidance of one of America’s potential Presidents?

But if Wright is Obama’s guru then aren’t we within our right to question comments the man has made publicly? Shouldn’t we be aware of what was taught by Wright and received by Obama? Isn’t this part of Barack Obama’s testimony?

Wright is in the news again, making comments against Fox News personalities. He was at a funeral of all places. I think he likes the spotlight and plans to take full advantage of his fifteen minutes. Where does that leave the Obama campaign?

Has your pastor (or other spiritual leader) said controversial things behind the pulpit? If you were running for public office, would you promote your pastor, or distance yourself?

Speaking of Race Relations

An interesting thing just happened to me. I walked across the street to the little deli and ordered lunch. They fixed it up for me (although I wonder sometimes how much mayonnaise they would normally put on a sandwich. I ask for light mayo and they still apply a spatula full on a six inch sub). I decided to use my bank card and the lady rang it up and printed the receipt for my signature.

"Just put your John Henry right here" she said.

John Henry? I know he was a steel driving man but I didn't know he was associated with signatures like John Hancock. Maybe white people put their John Hancocks on documents and black people put on their John Henrys.

Now the difference between me and a liberal race baiter is that I found the whole thing interesting and a little amusing. A liberal would have been offended. They might have even sued for damages seeing how they have been treated so differently!

Clintons on Receiving End of Race Baiting

One of these days I will have to explore the ramifications of schadenfreude with regards to the Christian walk. Until then I am just going to revel in it. The misfortune that is the source of my joy is the problems the Clintons are having in the Black community. Ever since Bill's "fairy tale" moment and Hillary's comment about Dr. Martin Luther King, then the subsequent "Shuck and Jive" incident, they have been working damage control to conserve their black votes. It is fun to watch them squirm especially since the very people who are attacking them usually attack Republicans and conservatives on their behalf.

Now personally I don't think they said anything of a racially prejudicial nature. But like so many things in this world it is the perception that is often more important than the truth. And isn't it so much easier to perceive things the way you want to than to actually analyze what is really going on?

Looking at the clip of Bill, I think it is pretty obvious that when he said "fairy tale" he was not referring to Obama's campaign, but his assertion that his (Obama's)judgment on the war was superior to Hillary's. To me this is a non issue. Let the black leaders rant and rave at Obama's alleged slighting, but who cares? To me the bigger issue is that there are Democrats who all voted for the war and are now saying that what was sold to them was a lie and that they thought they were voting on giving Bush authority to go to war only after more inspectors were sent and Saddam Hussein was given more time to comply. What? Didn't they read the resolution? And why were they silent about it until it became a campaign point? Hmmm.

Hillary's comment on Dr. Martin Luther King's dream beginning to be realized by President Johnson was basically correct. After all, rights (real and imagined) in this country come from our Constitution, which states how congress passes laws which affect us as citizens. So technically it was congress which passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which according to Hillary, was the beginning of the realization of Dr. King's Dream. So where is the racism there? Speaking as a current black American and former liberal I can feel and understand the fear that some black leaders are expressing. The fear that "The Man" (in this case Hillary) is trying to diminish the contribution of blacks, specifically Dr. King, in the betterment of their own situation. It looked like Hillary was saying that white men were responsible for making the dream real. What she was really trying to say, contrary to Obama's assertion that the current leadership is giving false hopes and saying that dreams will die, is that Presidential power, the kinds she hopes to wield, can go along way in realizing peoples dreams. No slight there. Let's face it. (I am going to catch Hell for saying this) the work the abolitionists did, the slaves, carried to freedom on the underground railroad, and the lives lost in the Civil War, only pointed out the need for freedom of the black people in the country. But without a 14th Amendment, we would still have slavery. Likewise Dr. King and his work and the work of others like him showed the world the need for civil rights in America. But Dr. King didn't sign the Civil Rights Act into law.

And finally the hoopla over the shuck and jive comment is just laughable. I think people really don't have enough real issues to concern themselves with. Still it is fun to watch the Democrats attack each other over such silliness!

What do you think?

Guilty Pride

Well I would be remiss in my duties as a blogger, If I fail to make some comment on the Iowa caucuses.


First, Huckabee. I was surprised that he was number one and disappointed that Romney at number two, did as well as he did. Giuliani's showing was unexpectedly low. Howver; in Iowa the GOP leaders takes all so everybody but Huckabee was a loser!



To be completely honest with you, I really do not have a good feeling for any of the GOP candidates for president. And how sad it is that? I really like and admire George W. Bush, and was very glad and excited to vote for him. I have no similar feeling towards any of the GOP today.


Second there is Obama. I am pleased as punch that Barak beat the Hillary machine. I think the good old boys in the Democratic Party are all doing a major rethink. What I find particularly interesting is the alleged crisis of black leadership. Many of the old-school black leaders, all threw in with Hillary. But it appears that many of the younger African Americans support Obama. With his victory in the predominantly white state of Iowa, the black elder statesmen have to wonder if they backed the right horse. Different than the GOP contest, The Democrats get so many delegates based on their final standing.

Now I am a registered Republican. But I have always believed in voting for the best man for the job. (I purposely left off the P.C. “or woman” because in this particular contest I don’t think it applies.) Usually though it means voting for the lesser of two evils. But I am not likely to cross party lines and vote for Obama. While I admit a substantial bit of guilty pride, Barak and I are too far apart politically for me to choose him in good conscience. But I hope he keeps beating Hillary!

What Do You Mean He's Black?

I noticed in the credits for the upcoming Iron Man Movie that the role of Nick Fury will be played by Samuel L. Jackson. Well old school comic fans like myself remember that Colonel Nick Fury of S.H.I.E.L.D. was a white man. He was a white man when he was Sgt. Fury and his Howling Commandoes too. But in the Ultimate Avengers series he is an African American. And this has cause some issues with comic purists. They don't seem to feel it is right to reimagine Nick Fury as an African American. But who to blame? It would be wrong to blame Hollywood because this movie is following a growing trend in the comics industry to PC-ize old minor and supporting heroes. Heroes who were once white males are being replaced by African Americans, Asians and Hispanics. Some are being replaced by women.

I am not quite sure if I approve of this trend. But I haven't followed comics for over a decade. The comic companies claim to be reaching out to minorities. But minorities are not a big part of the comic reading demographic. I suppose that supports the comic companies actions if you believe the lack of minority readership is due to to a lack of minority heroes. But if Bruce Wayne suddenly died and a Hispanic teen stepped in and took up the mantle of Batman, would more Hispanics read it? But that will never happen. They will never change the major players, Superman, Spiderman, Batman, Wonder Woman. So is changing just the minor characters sending the wrong message?

Actually Samuel L. as Fury isn't so bad in my book. The Ulltimate Avengers has had a Black Nick Fury for five or so years now. A neat piece of trivia mentioned on the IMDb site:

In an issue of the Marvel comic Ultimates (the Ultimate version of the Avengers, of which Iron Man is a member) the eponymous superheroes discuss who could play them in a possible movie, and Nick Fury (who is African-American in the Ultimate reality and artistically based on Sam Jackson, bearing a striking resemblance throughout the entirety of the series) says the only actor who could portray him is Samuel L. Jackson. Jackson plays Fury in this film

Still you could always go back and have David Hasselhoff reprise his role as Nick Fury: Agent of Shield (1998)(TV)

That'll teach ya.

Should They Fire Imus

Should Don Imus be fired for his “nappy headed hos” comment directed at the Rutgers woman’s basketball team? Who cares I don’t listen to Imus. I do feel the comment was uncalled for and he should have apologized to the Rugters women and NOT to Al Sharpton. How did Al get involved anyway? Oh yeah, someone said something offensive about black people. And Big Al ever the champion of race baiting and headline grabbing rose to the challenge of speaking on behalf of African Americans everywhere. Who asked him? And who told him to be outraged on my behalf?

Imus is an idiot. He’s a professional idiot and people pay him a lot of money for his oral refuse. He is constantly pushing the envelope because that equates to ratings, and ratings equates to revenue. Occasionally he will cross some line and say something inappropriate. We all have done the same. Am I condoning or excusing his behavior? Not at all. I am merely saying that it is to be expected. So what should we do about it? “Bad Imus! Apologize!” Oh wait he did. So I guess we should move on.

Why? Because “nappy headed hos” is tame compared to the filth that supposedly non-racist blacks call each other on a daily basis in their music, in their videos and films. Where’s the outrage? You will only hear it from the pulpits. And Al is supposed to be a minister of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. It is the highest form of hypocrisy to hold others to a standard that you do not apply to yourself. Jesus reminds us to regard the beam in our own eye. Al condemns Imus but gives rappers and film makers a free pass. If Sharpton preached the standards of the Bible and the black community had enough self-respect and self esteem to banish the words of self –hatred, Imus would have to resign. But he didn’t say anything about those hard working, college women that you wouldn’t hear in a music video. He merely parroted the attitude that the black community allows its young people to have towards women. And that is what should be addressed and dealt with.