Thousands of Americans across the country are lighting the Mishumaa Saba, donning their Uwole and offering libations to the ancestors from the Kikombe cha Umoja.
The seven days of Kwanzaa have begun.
Since the crassness of blatant commercialism has begun to obscure the true meaning of this most ancient and special of holidays let us take time to remember the words of its founder, Ron Karenga, Professor of Black Studies, California State University - Long Beach and leader of the black nationalist US Organization.
"The Christian is our worse enemy. Quiet as it's kept, it was a Christian who enslaved us. Quiet as it's kept it's a Christian who burns us. Quiet as it's kept it's a Christian who beats us down on the street; and quiet as it's kept when the thing goes down it'll be a Christian that's shooting us down. You have to face the fact that if the Christian is doing all this there must be something wrong with Christianity.
...it was chosen to give a Black alternative to the existing holiday and give Blacks an opportunity to celebrate themselves and history, rather than simply imitate the practice of the dominant society."
Hey, if it's in Wikipedia then it must be the gospel truth.
As we have all come to know, Kwanzaa was originally inspired by Swahili and Zulu harvest or "first-fruit" celebrations. Since December 26 is the fourth day of winter one would imagine the fruit would be rather withered on the branch by now. You'd think that celebrating Kwanzaa in September would be better timing especially since the Zulu have a holiday in September celebrating the birth of Shaka who formed the Zulu nation in 1816, merging the divergent Nguni-speaking tribes in the Natal. Of course the Zulu were primarily cattle herders in South Africa who relegated farming to their women. And Swahili is an East African language. And most descendents of American slaves trace their ancestry to West Africa...
But a winter harvest festival it is.
On Karenga's "Official Kwanzaa" website the typical symbols of the holiday are pictured. Shown are the Mkeka (mat), Kinara (candle holder) and Mazao (crops) with an ancestral offering of oranges, corn and bananas. Of course oranges originated in Asia and maize was stolen from the Mesoamericans. And most of my black friends, if you made an offering of bananas to them, would beat the crap out of you.
Apparently one doesn't have to be white anymore to be racially tone-deaf. Which is apparent at the "FAQ" portion of Kuranga's website.
"Can people who are not of African descent participate in Kwanzaa activities?
Kwanzaa is clearly an African holiday created for African peoples. But other people can and do celebrate it, just like other people participate in Cinco de Mayo besides Mexicans; Chinese New Year besides Chinese; Native American pow wows besides Native Americans."
Mexicans don't celebrate Cinco de Mayo. It's primarily an American holiday and an excuse for gringos to go their favorite Mexican restaurant and get wasted on tequila and margaritas. Most Indians would be rather offended at their religious ceremonies being coarsely referred to as a "pow wow" kemo sabe.
It should also be noted that although it's alright for untermenschen to attend a celebration only someone who is racially pure can lead a Kwanzaa ritual.
"But in any case, particular people should always be in control of and conduct their own celebrations. Audience attendance is one thing; conducting a ritual is another."
Particular people indeed.
Some things to remember.
"You should not mix the Kwanzaa holiday or its symbols, values and practice with any other culture. This would violate the principles of Kujichagulia (Self-Determination) and thus violate the integrity of the holiday."
I guess Kuranga doesn't want any nasty Hebrew or Buddhist influence.
Kwanzaa emphasizes the "Seven Principles of Blackness":
Umoja (Unity) to strive for and maintain unity in the family, community, nation and race. (Ein reich, ein volk...)
Kujichagulia (Self-Determination) to define ourselves, name ourselves, create for ourselves and speak for ourselves.
Ujima (Collective Work and Responsibility) to build and maintain our community together and make our brother's and sister's problems our problems and solve them together.
Ujamaa (Cooperative Economics) to build and maintain our own stores, shops and other business and to profit from them together.
Nia (Purpose) to make our collective vocation the building and developing of our community in order to restore our people to their traditional greatness.
Kuumba (Creativity) to do as much as we can, in the way we can, in order leave our community more beautiful and beneficial than we inherited it.
Imani (Faith) To believe with all our heart in our people, our parents, our teachers, our leaders and the righteousness and victory of our struggle.
One is reminded of a German political philosopher who wrote an obscure treatise on collective work.
So, just like President George W. Bush, who issued his annual Kwanzaa greetings, I'd like to pass along a heartfelt Joyous Kwanzaa.
Well wishes also go out to every guilty white liberal who has moved to Seattle, driven up real estate prices and have priced residents in traditionally black communities like the Rainier Valley, the C.D. and Columbia City out of the area.
Extra: And remember, there are only four more shopping days until Freedom Day if you're looking to buy a gift for that special Scientologist in the family - who was taken away.
I've only known one person to even make an attempt to celebrate Kwanza, and she had "60's activist" written all over her. I fail to even see why they keep attempting to legitimize this little piece of moronic Marxist drivel.
Posted by: John Galt on December 26, 2007 09:28 AMKwanzaa supporters are doing the same thing that the early Christians did. The religious views are in competition with each other, just like animals in a natural niche. The religions will evolve and mutate like species, and the competition will tend to make each tradition more suited to survival, unless one religion manages to out-compete the other... Religions are "memes." They are like species that seek their own replication and survival. They are subject to very similar Darwinian forces that animal and plant species are...
Face it, if you go back far enough, most Christian holidays are invented as well. The only difference is in how long ago the holidays were invented. So you can criticize Kwanzaa for it's racism, or it's anti-Christianity, or it's Marxism, but as for arbitrariness, it is no more arbitrary than Christmas. I oppose racism and Marxism.
This whole thread is just another example of the conflict that arrises from there being multiple religious traditions in the world. The founders of our great country knew the wisdom of tolerance for all peaceful religious views. We must tolerate freedom of conscience and religion. We draw the line only where individuals violate the rights to life, liberty and property of others, whether the motivation for their violence is religious or not.
So, we tolerate the KKK as long as it does not lynch. We tolerate the catholic priests as long as they do not molest boys. And we tolerate the Kwanzaa celebrants as long as they do not hurt anyone or steal from anyone, no matter how racist or Marxist their views are. Even we peaceful atheists must be tolerated. I know you don't like that...
What you white Christians are afraid of is competition. You are afraid that Kwanzaa will erode participation in Christianity among urban blacks. Well, just like a business or a species, you must not be protected from competition. To do so is anti-free market. Your only choice is to do a better job of meeting the needs of urban and liberal blacks with an adapted form of Christianity. If black gospel churches are no longer doing it, I advise you to innovate. Give them a version of Christianity that meets their needs. This competition will make everyone better off.
Big business always trys to get special advantages from the government to protect it from competition from small businesses which are innovative. But collusion between big-business and government hurts consumers and is unjust. Big religion should also get no special help from the government in maintaining it's near-monopoly power. Such government-religion collusion is why religion in Europe is so anemic. Instead, why don't Christians embrace the competition that comes from Kwanzaa? In the long run, this competition will make Christianity stronger, not weaker.
On the topic of the materialism and commercialism that has become an integral part of the American Christmas tradition, I applaud this development! It is merely capitalism, and true capitalism is a very good thing. We are creating wealth for ourselves, and then sharing that wealth with those we love. There is nothing wrong with this "commercialism" at all. I thought you Republicans were supposed to be fiscal conservatives?
Free Minds and Free Markets! :)
Posted by: Bruce Guthrie on December 26, 2007 10:55 AMI've still never met anybody that actually celebrates this crap. You have to either hate whitey or be very ignorant of this holiday's origins to bring it into your home.
Posted by: Shank on December 26, 2007 10:59 AMI wonder how many said that about Joseph Smith after he invented his religion.
Posted by: pbj on December 26, 2007 11:03 AMAll holidays were invented at one point or another---no big deal there. And there is nothing arbitrary about Kwanzaa---it's about anti-Americanism, anti-white racism, and black separatism, as if American blacks really need to be further isolated from mainstream culture. White liberals love the idea of Kwanzaa, for the reasons I just mentioned; but nobody else is really all that thrilled with it...including American blacks.
Posted by: Shank on December 26, 2007 11:11 AMAre you saying that Kwanzaa has a bright future ahead of it like Mormonism? Or that Mormons hate whitey? I guess I don't quite get your point.
Posted by: Shank on December 26, 2007 11:27 AMThat he forgot it was white Christians who fought and died to free slaves in this country
I'm sure they we're fighting for just that reason...I can see the recruitment posters now..."Join the US Army, do your part to help free the slaves".
forgot that african balcks are killing each other on a daily basis in huge numbers
In Iraq, huge number of Arabs are killing each other on a daily basis in huge numbers. Killing your fellow countryman is certainly not isolated to African countries.
Forgot that his fellow black africans are still involved in the slave trade.
Depends, does smuggling a person into the United States and forcing them to work as a sex worker/sweat shop employee for little to no money count as slavery? If so there are a lot of Asian countries that can claim this as well.
Its amazing what selective amnesia can accomplish, but then again, this is what happens when pc/socialist people gain power
Or selective ignorance on your part.
It should also be noted that Shaka Zulu killed tens of thousands of fellow zulus to consolidate his power.
So have most leaders and empires throughout history, see Mongols, Greeks, Romans, Incas, 200 years of Crusades, 16th Century Spain, 18th Century England, early 20th Century Europe, mid-20th Century China, late 20th Century Iraq/Iran, again selective ignorance on your part. How many natives did the settlers kill to make this country we know as the U.S.A? Give it a break.
Lots of good people there but a sad inability to self govern in good order.
That, lack of natural resources, and a long tradition of tribal wars/feuds stretching back centuries.
Europe was this way up until the early 20th Century, thankfully cooler heads too over and realized they could make a lot more money trading with each other than fighting with each other.
Someday the African nations will do the same. If they make that jump expect China to lead the way (since they certainly have the most invested in the exploiting Africa's sparse natural resources).
I believe it was a conscious decision on your part to do so.
Your credibility on all thing political has been falling as your rabid RP zealotry has been growing, and while I know you are atheist, I never once believed you were an anti-religious bigot.... until now.
Posted by: Ragnar Danneskjold on December 26, 2007 12:07 PMI can't speak for anyone else here, but I will start caring what liberals have to say as soon as liberals have something to say that isn't lunacy. As for the so called "black studies professor", it appears to me that he is just another Ward Churchill with a slightly different agenda. Hell, I bet he isn't really even black.
Bwahahahahaha!!!
I believe you are correct. I think he was convicted of felony assault and unlawful imprisonment and did a prison stretch. Isn't it amazing what some people will inflict on themselves and call it a role model. Consider Adolf Hitler...O.J. Simpson...Bill Clinton!!! Oh, that was so rude of me!
Posted by: NW Denizen on December 26, 2007 01:16 PMIn 1971 Karenga, Louis Smith, and Luz Maria Tamayo were convicted of felony assault and false imprisonment for assaulting and torturing over a two day period two women from the Us organization, Deborah Jones and Gail Davis. [4] A May 14, 1971 article in the Los Angeles Times described the testimony of one of the women: "Deborah Jones, who once was given the Swahili title of an African queen, said she and Gail Davis were whipped with an electrical cord and beaten with a karate baton after being ordered to remove their clothes. She testified that a hot soldering iron was placed in Ms. Davis's mouth and placed against Ms. Davis's face and that one of her own big toes was tightened in a vise. Karenga also put detergent and running hoses in their mouths, she said."
Posted by: Shank on December 26, 2007 01:50 PMThe point was that Mormonism isn't that "old". Right after Smith invented it, don't you think some were skeptical as well?
Posted by: pbj on December 26, 2007 01:51 PMI practice neither religion, nor any other for that matter. If I were forced to choose Kwanzaa or Catholicism, I'm not sure which I would pick. Both have advantages and disadvantages. I'm glad I live in a country where we are not forced to adopt a religion.
I seem to need to clarify my statements for you a lot lately. Please read carefully, my friend.
You and I are on the same side of most fiscal issues. We are both Ayn Rand fans and individualists and fans of limited, Constitutional government. Perhaps we should dwell on our commonalities for a while to diffuse some of the tension that seems to have built up.
Posted by: Bruce Guthrie on December 26, 2007 01:55 PMBruce Guthrie needs to let go of. I suggest the FAQs in the following page.
"...Second, as is mentioned below, Christians likely chose December 25th for Jewish reasons."
http://www.churchyear.net/christmas.html
Posted by: Robert on December 26, 2007 02:04 PMIn the future, lack of water is going to a much bigger problem for many of these countries. More wars are destined to happen as unsustainable population fights each other for access to whatever water resources remain.
Yes, I'm sure many were skeptical of Mormonism when it was younger, just as many are still skeptical of Mormonism today, just as every religion has many skeptics. I'm not sure what your take on Mormonism is, so I don't know if your point is that Kwanzaa is unfairly picked on just because it's young or if your point is that Mormonism deserves to be picked on as well.
Kwanzaa is unusually divisive, in part because of the racist and criminal mindset of its creator. The point of the holiday is racial and cultural separatism. Political correctness and fear of being called racist is the only thing that prevents Kwanzaa from receiving the derisive mockery it so richly deserves.
Posted by: Shank on December 26, 2007 02:13 PMRon Karenga (aka Dr. Maulana Ron Karenga) invented the seven-day feast (Dec. 26-Jan. 1) in 1966, branding it a black alternative to Christmas. The idea was to celebrate the end of what he considered the Christmas-season exploitation of African Americans.
According to the official Kwanzaa Web site -- as opposed, say, to the Hallmark Cards Kwanzaa site -- the celebration was designed to foster "conditions that would enhance the revolutionary social change for the masses of Black Americans" and provide a "reassessment, reclaiming, recommitment, remembrance, retrieval, resumption, resurrection and rejuvenation of those principles (Way of Life) utilized by Black Americans' ancestors."
Read more here: http://www.jewishworldreview.com/tony/snow123199.asp
Actually, there has been a lot of study done on the birth of Christ--current thinking is that he was most likely born in the Spring, probably in April. One researcher's idea is that he was born on April 17 in the year 6BC. His clues come in the form of a Roman coin from 13AD that had Aries on the back of it looking over his shoulder at a bright star. April 17, 6BC was the date of a celestial phenomenon in the Aries constellation. An explanation of this idea is here Star of Bethlehem
As for Easter, the Bible clearly notes that the Last Supper was in celebration of Passover, which is why Easter, like Passover, is tied to the Lunar calendar. Easter is always the first Sunday after the first full moon after the Vernal Equinox. So no, it wasn't "situated to upstage the rights of Spring", it was put as near as could be determined, when it occurred.
Posted by: Bill H on December 26, 2007 02:29 PMI don't know if Kwaanza will develop into a long-lasting tradition and really penetrate the culture any more than it has now. It seems like more of the black folk in our life don't celebrate it. But, I doubt many people who celebrate Kwaanza are doctrinaire followers of the ideologies of its founders. More likely, they've grabbed onto the idea as a form of celebration and community building that they can adapt to their own needs and desires. As others have noted, this is the story of most holiday traditions.
BTW, I'm not black and I don't celebrate Kwaanza, but I am the parent of two black children (by adoption), and I've been able to participate with them in a few Kwaanza celebrations. Marxist ideology was not discussed, but history and culture were. The events were wonderful, simple parties or dinners that meant a lot to my children, as well as my wife and me. WTF is wrong with that???
Posted by: BillL on December 26, 2007 02:37 PMReal Brothers go for Black Jesus:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sZObIEKNFwM
Here's a thought, lets all celebrate our holidays as we wish and not expect the government to help us with that. Lets stop bickering and getting upset over greetings. And lets stop obsessing over what holiday and holiday traditions are correct, appropriate, or best.
Holidays are supposed to be fun times people.
Posted by: Giffy on December 26, 2007 03:17 PMI concur, tolerance of others sure beats the pants off the religious zealotry that Ragnar seems to advocate.
Posted by: Cato on December 26, 2007 03:24 PMThe agnostic secular celebratory Christmas ought to be celebrated by all Americans, as at this point, it's far more a celebration of capitalism and other Americana. It's a big part of our American fall/winter culture, and almost everyone engages in it, regardless of their religious tradition. I saw a Muslim woman in a burqa, working at a shop at SeaTac, putting out Christmas decorations. I'm sure she's fine with that, and so was I.
It's a great country where people can privately enjoy their religious traditions, as well as joyously celebrate our common successful commercial culture and the benevolence associated with the season.
Posted by: Jeff B.. on December 26, 2007 03:28 PMAs for the slavery issue, it's improtant to realize that many, many Africans and Muslims were involved in the trade. It wasn't just white Christian folks!
Posted by: Politically Incorrect on December 26, 2007 03:35 PMNow, if only you'll walk the walk.
Posted by: Hinton on December 26, 2007 04:59 PMThree cheers for the 1st Amendment!!
Those lawsuits came on behalf of some very offended and now (likely) very wealthy individuals. The American legal system makes it very handy to file these sorts of lawsuits. If you don't like the law, petition your congress(wo)man to change it. This is how the systems of checks and balances works, maybe you should take advantage of it rather than whining about it on some BB.
Good MLKing cattle, they was.
Yup.
Posted by: Independent Voter on December 26, 2007 08:05 PMActually Christmas was set at December 25 because it falls nine months to the day after the Feast of the Annunciation on March 25, also known as the Incarnation of Christ, i.e. the start of Mary's pregnancy. It is my understanding that the Roman leaders instituted a pagan holiday on Dec. 25 in the third century or so to compete with the Christian celebration and because of the winter solstice aspect. So, the urban legend has it backwards. The observance of March 25 as the Annunciation is very ancient and common to both the eastern and western branches of Christendom.
Co-opting pagan symbols and objects and reinterpreting them in the Christian sense is an ancient and honorable practice. Christianity asserts that all that is good in another culture is worth retaining. The Christmas tree and the shamrock are two examples. I am sure that the rapid expansion of Christianity in Asia and Africa will result in even more of them.
2. Bush caved because he doesn't want Sharpton/Jackson, two faux preachers of the Word calling him a bigot. Dude, they do anyhow. Stand up for your principles and call a spade a spade.
3. The creator is a felon who was involved in a truly heinous crime. His case illustrates what is wrong with a lot of the insitutions in this society:
"The US would not last too much longer. On September 17, 1971, Karenga was sentenced to one to ten years in prison on counts of felonious assault and false imprisonment. The charges stemmed from a May 9, 1970 incident in which Karenga and two others tortured two women who Karenga believed had tried to kill him by placing 'crystals' in his food and water.
A year later the Los Angeles Times described the events: 'Deborah Jones, who once was given the title of an African queen, said she and Gail Davis were whipped with an electrical cord and beaten with a karate baton after being ordered to remove their clothes. She testified that a hot soldering iron was placed in Miss Davis' mouth and placed against Miss Davis' face and that one of her own big toes was tightened in a vice. Karenga, head of US, also put detergent and running hoses in their mouths, she said.'
The shooting at UCLA caused Karenga to become deeply paranoid and spurred his bizarre behavior. At his trial, the question of Karenga's sanity arose. The psychiatrist's report stated, 'This man now represents a picture which can be considered both paranoid and schizophrenic with hallucinations and elusions, inappropriate affect, disorganization, and impaired contact with the environment.' The psychiatrist observed that Karenga talked to his blanket and imaginary persons and believed that he had been attacked by dive-bombers.
Eight years later California State University at Long Beach made Karenga the head of its Black Studies Department. Karenga had toned down his rhetoric and abandoned his cultural nationalism for straightforward Marxism. As an academic Karenga has authored various books on such topics as Egyptian art and has guest lectured at
Stanford...."
http://dartreview.com/archives/2001/01/15/the_story_of_kwaanza.php
4. If one wants time tested instruction on how to live, consult the Book of Proverbs.
5. I have to be careful how I state this. The basic truth of Chritianity is unaltered. What is going to happen is that Kwaanza's "celebration"
will be absorbed into the Christian message of God loves all people. I think Hallmark will be able to keep the cards and candles going for a few more years and then it will just be a speciality item for those stuck in the 60s.
As a humanist I really don't have a dog in this hunt, but Kwanzaa isn't a religious holiday, or a commemoration of an important historical event, it is just a political statement. A political statement that isn't designed to celebrate as it is to attack the most important cultural and religious holiday of our country. That strikes me as a particularly pathetic reason to have a festival or celebration. It would be like a batch of progressives creating a period of mourning from July 5 - 12 to note the destruction of native North American cultures or the loss of the spotted owl.
If blacks in this country want to have a holiday of celebration for their (lost?) culture then make it a positive day and a positive message. Yeah, yeah, another fat balding hairy white guy telling blacks what to do. Just what they need. Maybeso, but it is a damn site better advice then they get from the yahoos promoting Kwanzaa.
Hairy
Posted by: Hairy Buddah on December 26, 2007 10:08 PMIt was designed to be a finger in the eye. Just as Bush doesn't want to be called a bigot, many of the Black elite don't want to be called bigots either and it helps fit in with the folks. Hallmark is laughing all the way to the bank.
It is Christians that were at the forefront of the abolition movement and people of faith both Christians and Jews who moved civil rights. Many secular progressive/atheist/libertarians can't even say slavery was wrong, so promoting a felon torturer is no surprise.
Posted by: WVH on December 26, 2007 10:43 PMIt is not just Blacks. After Bush was elected did Sean Penn, Harry Belafonte, Susan Sarandan, and Tim Robbins leave the county? Heck no, Pacific Palisades, Bel Air and the Dakota are just too dang comfortable. I have an American passport and love to travel, but I will kick your a$$ets if you try and take it from me. It is too dang comfortable here compared to other places. Even that faux Native American Marxist, Ward Churchill never took his lame butt to Cuba. The academic elite is a subsidized class just like the old Soviet elite. Also, the fact of the case above is not widely publicized, not PC.
Posted by: WVH on December 26, 2007 11:29 PMYet those who would dismiss Kwanzaa in this way, in all fairness, ought to also dismiss Christianity for their criminals of association (gay crack whore Haggard, boy boning preists et al).
It is really moot anyway because Kwanzaa is not religious, it is a cultural celebration. Only a bunch of crackers and oreos would be so without a life as to have to waste time posting in blogs about how awful it must be. Someone encouraging blacks to work hard, treat each other with respect and persue the American dream, why that is one step from communism according to some narrow minded bigots here.
I think you crackers and oreos have too much time on your hands.
Posted by: Atheist on December 27, 2007 03:17 AMRiiiiight! When Karenga isn't beating black women with electrical cords and karate chuks, or forcing them to perform felatio on hot soldering irons, he is encouraging them to work hard, and treat each other with respect. Give me a break! Undoubtedly, WVH is correct.
Big deal, the creator of Christmas was a convicted criminal who was crucified on a hilltop along with two other criminals. He was a gang leader who actively encouraged the overthrow of the provincial Govt. at the time.
Let's not get into the many heinous crimes committed on behalf of the Catholic Church.
I have a couple of active blogs myself. At least I have the common decency to not abuse the good folks at SP with completely off subject worthless comments and link backs.
Posted by: G Jiggy on December 27, 2007 09:27 AMSomething you should try.
But, you do have a good point. Is there really anything constructive in talking about politics? Does any of the world's ills ever get solved? Is poverty ever going to be eliminated? Is anyone going to solve the population crisis? But, if we don't do it, who will?
Don't you just cringe at the thought of a Clinton presidency along with super majorities in the House and Senate? Don't you just worry about the carnage that would result?
What do you think of the Bhutto assassination and how it will affect our Stryker troops? Oil prices have already gone up because of that assassination.
Posted by: swatter on December 27, 2007 09:28 AMAnd when Ted Haggard isn't with a gay hooker smoking crack, and Fred Phelps isn't protesting at a soldier's funeral and the local priest isn't boning an alter boy, I am sure they are fine upstanding citizens too. Should we discount Christianity because of them?
I must have missed where in the Kwanzaa tradition it states to beat people with cords. Perhaps that is a new Christian tradition you have introduced with the Woman Venting Hate?
Posted by: Atheist on December 27, 2007 09:33 AMThe problem with the American left, other than the fact that the tie that binds them to post enlightenment European thought is transparent in it's rabid anti-Semitism and dim witted anti-Christian bigotry, is that they actually believe their rhetoric even when it is demonstrably nonsensical. It was Christians who drove the anti-slavery movement, it was Christians who were responsible for the Civil Rights movement in this country and on and on.
B..LSH.T.
Posted by: Hank on December 27, 2007 10:04 AMNeighbors? Man, where you been? Because of the fastness of our society, there hasn't been time to talk to the neighbors regularly. I only see mine in the spring on one weekend when we both happen to be doing yardwork. Hardly conducive to political talk.
Please elaborate.
Posted by: swatter on December 27, 2007 10:23 AMAnd Hello once again to a controlled Washington spending and some real Tax freedom!
Posted by: GS on December 27, 2007 10:36 AM"the toll outstrips any toll raced up which was done in the name of any organized religion"
What a bunch of crock, organized religion has been around for thousands of years they have a much bigger head start. Marxism is a product of the late 20th Century. While I agree lots of heinous crimes have been committed in the name of "Revolution" it's a far cry to say that more people have been slaughtered in the name of Marxism since 1848 when the Communist Manifesto was published than have died in the last several thousand years of organized religion.
"It was Christians who drove the anti-slavery movement,"
Yes, and it was the Christians who drove the Slavery movement as well (see Europe pre-18th Century, all nations were Christian nations). Maybe not so much as the many religions that existed prior to it, but the bible (and Christianity) has most certainly been used justify slavery.
"Christians who were responsible for the Civil Rights movement in this country and on and on."
Let see, the KKK is what...a Christian movement. Mormonism is (you guessed it) a Christian organization that actively discriminated until the 70's. Don't give me that high-and-mighty Christians can do no wrong BS. They are just as responsible as everyone else (Christian, Jewish, Atheist, Muslim, etc) for Slavery and the anti-slavery movement.
Well, finally here is someone who is willing to admit that it wasn't all whitey's fault.
Say by the way, when are blacks going to start paying reparations to the Jews?
Posted by: NW Denizen on December 27, 2007 10:57 AM- Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan
Guess what? The days in which the New York Times readers have the luxury of not having to separate fact from "fact" is over. They are being exposed for the bunch of Anthropogenic Catistrophic Global Warming Casandras they are because the "facts" they have relied on were out and out FABRICATIONS. Actually expect all the nonsensical leftist crap you hold so dear to suffer the same fate now that control over information is no longer in the hands of the few.
Read it here - http://constitutionalistnc.tripod.com/hitler-leftist/leftrace.html
Posted by: JDH on December 27, 2007 11:38 AMHairy Buddah summed it up well:
"Kwanzaa isn't a religious holiday, or a commemoration of an important historical event, it is just a political statement. A political statement that isn't designed to celebrate as it is to attack the most important cultural and religious holiday of our country. That strikes me as a particularly pathetic reason to have a festival or celebration."
Posted by: Shank on December 27, 2007 11:39 AMI'm afraid you are the one spouting nonsense. Like this "fact" right here, complete nonsense.
"The toll that leftist/athiestic regimes racked up in the past century alone surpasses the total of all previous genicidal episodes combined."
Let's see...so your saying that the number of people TOTAL killed by Crusaders, Aztecs, Incas, Greeks, Romans, Pre-20th Century Europe, Jim Jones, Young Jin Moon, Egyptians, Turks, etc throughout the history of Organized Religion TOTAL COMBINED IS LESS than that of Marxist regimes of the 20th Century. I laugh just pondering about how ridiculous that statement is.
"The leftist/athiests reliance on the Jason Blairs of the world"
Haha, one bad apple doesn't spoil the bunch. Just like atheists don't feel that the KKK is the sole representative of modern Christianity (or even the people who flail themselves to share Jesus' pain). I don't personally rely on Jason Blair much you don't rely on Ted Haggard and Oral Roberts of the world for your guidance in Christ. Your wide generalizations and stereotypes just prove how ignorant you are as an individual.
"They are being exposed for the bunch of Anthropogenic Catistrophic Global Warming Casandras they are because the "facts" they have relied on were out and out FABRICATIONS."
Funny, that's the same way I feel about the Bibles story about the creation of heaven and earth, the so called facts that have been relied on for generations have been proven to be complete and total FABRICATIONS. The world was not created in eight days, medical science can prove that Eve was not created from Adam's rib, and genetics point out that there was no true Adam and Eve.
"Actually expect all the nonsensical leftist crap you hold so dear to suffer the same fate now that control over information is no longer in the hands of the few."
Let me get this straight, you are actively advocating a return to the Dark Ages where the Church controlled the flow of information? Did Copernicus not die in vain? IMHO the internet is the best thing that ever happened to information, you can now solicit experiences/opinions from a wide variety of sources and decide for yourself who is believable and who is not. You can believe Art Bell, Ron Paul, Bill Clinton, Dennis Kucinich, Karl Marx, Ramtha, or nobody at all. It's democracy and freedom of information at it's finest.
I don't rely on my feeeeeeelings, I base my decisions on evidence.
Now go play in the street or something. I have heard that in your pathetic little leftist world I am supposed to give how everyone feels equal weight but I do not live in that world.
Posted by: JDH on December 27, 2007 12:16 PMThen you should quit reading the bible then, it has no "evidence" to verify it's purported truthfulness. Modern science has proven the story of Genesis to be completely false. Also the earth is not flat, nor does the sun revolve around it.
You can't back up your so called "facts" about Marxism with actual evidence. You most certainly would not have been around during the time of the the October Revolution to whiteness any of these leftist/marxist executions firsthand. So explain to me why should I believe you over my historical evidence written about in history books and encyclopedias.
The moonbat left speculates that the U.S. is complicit in every international calamity. A high percentage of leftists thinks we attacked ourselves on 9/11. Bush Derangement Syndrome is out of control. Many liberals I know openly wish for an assassination at home, without any concern for how disgusting that makes them sound.
Posted by: Shank on December 27, 2007 12:33 PMAbortion is murder, but...
Abortion is a type of murder; I have no doubt about that. In this context we can debate over questions such as the duration of a pregnancy and when exactly do several cells turn into a person with a soul, but I have no interest in doing that. I accept the universal assumption that as of a certain moment, we are talking about a real person, and "aborting it" is a type of murder.
And still, as a woman and a mother, I must reject the religious hypocrisy and politically correct attitude of the religious social discourse, and declare that I am in favor of abortions. I support the right of a woman (or parents) to decide to end the pregnancy because she feels it is impossible for her to proceed with it.
Read the rest here:
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3486799,00.html
Wow, you are wise beyond your years. Yes, I believe in Darwinism and even social Darwinism. I also believe in DNA.
"let's hear your take on just exactly how the blood clotting mechanism evolved on a sub-cellular level given in way that leads step by step through the process and accounts for all of the biochemical processes taking place without resorting to any missing link"
Only if you can explain how God created such a thing with "his" onipitent knowledge Did he create it in a flash out of thin air? Was it in existence elsewhere in the universe? Did it take 7 days?
While I am not a geneticist I place more value in evolution than I do in some onipitent being making a man in his image out of magic dust. I do not hold your religious beliefs against you, I just choose to believe in something else. Thats my choice and right. You are the one who seeks to persecute me for it much like your ancestors have to others for centuries.
Maybe you should start following Jesus teachings of love and tolerance rather than trying to persecute me for believing in something different than you.
Oh yeah, it's now perfectly clear that your logic is so mush more superior than everyone elses. Give it a break already.
Hey Hinton, you accused me of having a stilted perspective. Seriously, I'm nothing compared to this JDH guy.
No your not, you've gone out on the crazy limb by calling me a leftist/marxist type for not sharing in your profound belief of creationism. You have also described my thought as "nonsensical leftist crap". It's quite obvious you don't have any tolerance for anyone else's views other than your own.
This was a debate about Kwanzaa, you've obviously hijacked it. My original point was comparing Jesus to WVH's note that the Kwanzaa creator was a convicted felon. I pointed out that Jesus was also considered a criminal and was executed by the state. It was really more to put the two holidays in a different perspective than to start a evolution vs creationism debate.
Though this isn't really a helpful comparison and is something of a reach. You say it is to add "perspective", but your anti-Christian bigotry shines through loud and clear in most of your posts on this topic. You probably don't consider it bigotry to hate Christians though.
Posted by: Shank on December 27, 2007 01:40 PMYeah, what the hell. Karenga was only convicted of forcing a couple of black broads to swallow hot soldering irons, while Jesus was convicted of the much more serious crime of speaking out against tyranny and social injustice. Christ got what he deserved alright.
Stop trying to play the victim, Boring. You were baiting a response and you got one.
I agree it is a stretch, but from a modern perspective Jesus could be considered a cult leader advocating the peaceful overthrow of the Jewish government (who were really just placating the Romans). Just because the religion is prevalent in modern society it does not mean that it is exempt from scrutiny. I hold my beliefs out for scrutiny, I highly encourage you to challenge them if you feel they are not in agreement with yours.
"your anti-Christian bigotry shines through loud and clear in most of your posts on this topic."
I might be anti-religion, we haven't discussed any other religions yet so you are just assuming. I may be a Christian myself playing Devils Advocate for my own amusement. It doesn't really matter now does it.
"You probably don't consider it bigotry to hate Christians though."
I have not used the word hate at all, JB used it @ 53 when he/she said "Kwanzaa is a blatently hate America and hate free markets proposition." I'm don't hate Christians, I admire their strength and contributions to society. A lot of Christians are quite good and generous, Mother Teresa and the organization she created is a great example. I do however fail see how Christians are being bigoted because Kwanzaa is recognized by some as a holiday that they wish to celebrate.
The United States is a multi-ethnic/cultural/religious society that should not cow tow to one particular religion over another. The democracy should thrive on the idea of diversity and tolerance while doing it's best to appease the will of those who vote for it's elected leaders
"It is my solumn belief that Kwanzaa is nothing more than another vehicle put together by the left for the purpose of advancing their agressive anti-Christian bigotry."
Wow, that's quite a theory you have there. Care to explain how Kwanzaa is hurting you as a Christian? Are you threatened in any way by it's existence? Is our overly fascist Govt. forcing you in any way to celebrate Kwanzaa over another holiday of your choosing?
Do you feel the same way about Hanukkah or the 4th of July? How about MLK Day, is that not a holiday celebrating the birth of a radical leftist preacher who was violently struck down in his quest to attain equal rights for his race?
You got it half-right. Tolerance is a good thing; but the promotion of "diversity" for its own sake is sheer stupidity. Finding our similarities is key. Leftists choose to downplay our similarities and emphasize our differences. Balkanization is the end result.
Posted by: Shank on December 27, 2007 02:30 PMOf course, I should have known Bill O'Riley was a big ol' Leftist with his "War on Christmas" talk.
1) The Roman State in the guise of Pontius Pilot ACQUITED Jesus of Nazarath on the charge of insurrection, stating "I find no wrong in the man" but was subsequently intimidated by a vigilante mob into first, scurging him in and attempt to placate the blood lust, and only then, bounding him over for crucifiction in a horse trade for the real insurrectionist Barrabas, all again, without charge.
2) Jesus was never about overthrow of the Roman occuppiers and was loyal to Rome, e.g., "Then render unto Ceasar what is Ceasar's" and again "My Kingdom is not of this world".
3) Christian economics is not easily classified as either socialist or free market--along with the exhortations to give to the poor, we must also acknowledge the parable of the talents. And of course Leviticus 19:15 demanding that we do not show undue partiality to the poor.
4) And finally, when considering the nearly 2,000 years of wrong doings purpetrated by the Church, this should be of little suprise to anyone with a smattering of historical recall. The first Pope denied God three times, and one of the first Cardinals sold him out for 30 pieces of silver. The real suprise should be how any organization with such a lousy IPO has managed to stay in business longer than any other top down entity in the history of the world.
Merry Christmas
Posted by: T.G. Dolando on December 27, 2007 03:25 PM1) The Roman State in the guise of Pontius Pilot ACQUITED Jesus of Nazarath on the charge of insurrection, stating "I find no wrong in the man" but was subsequently intimidated by a vigilante mob into first, scurging him in and attempt to placate the blood lust, and only then, bounding him over for crucifiction in a horse trade for the real insurrectionist Barrabas, all again, without charge.
2) Jesus was never about overthrow of the Roman occuppiers and was loyal to Rome, e.g., "Then render unto Ceasar what is Ceasar's" and again "My Kingdom is not of this world".
3) Christian economics is not easily classified as either socialist or free market--along with the exhortations to give to the poor, we must also acknowledge the parable of the talents. And of course Leviticus 19:15 demanding that we do not show undue partiality to the poor.
4) And finally, when considering the nearly 2,000 years of wrong doings purpetrated by the Church, this should be of little suprise to anyone with a smattering of historical recall. The first Pope denied God three times, and one of the first Cardinals sold him out for 30 pieces of silver. The real suprise should be how any organization with such a lousy IPO has managed to stay in business longer than any other top down entity in the history of the world.
Merry Christmas
Posted by: T.G. Dolando on December 27, 2007 03:26 PMThe KKK It is tolerated under the right of free association....which in case you forgot is protected under the US Constitution. They have a right to protest, they have a right to seek new members, they have a right to publish their hate (which is mostly over the internet). I don't support them, I don't associate with them, that's my choice.
I tolerate them because they exist, I would hope they would fade out, but there's always going to be someone white guy who feels slighted by others of different races who will be attracted to this movement. Since they are not violent they are allowed to exist under the laws of the land.
Free speech isn't perfect but the alternative is far worse.
Festivus has an ice cream named after it.
Kwanzaa does not.
When Festivus (of Seinfeld fame) outstrips Kwanzaa in terms of public perception and practitioners, then Kwanzaa is dead. Long live Festivus!
And with that, I'm off to move tomorrow. Bye all!
Posted by: Edmonds Dan on December 27, 2007 04:48 PMNo, Bush Did it himself, he is now dead, and a duplicate is now in control. you libs can now celebrate!
9/11 didn't happen, there are no Islamic terrorists, and Elvis is still alive, and will be hosting the ball drop in NY on Jan 1, 2008.
It has to be done to save the children, and global warming is killing us all as we all board our Private Jets to scoot off to our three massive energy sucking homes, while we shine our Nobel's and cash in on the millions we're taking in selling snake oil to the masses.
Isn't capitalism great!
Happy New Year
Posted by: gs on December 27, 2007 05:15 PM
In fact here's an excellent article that explores the phenomenon of leftist racism in, not great depth, but coherently enough to get the point across: Here's an excerpt just to wet your appetite -
"Nazism was Leftist
Probably the ultimate racist creed was Nazism. And one of the great confidence tricks of the 20th Century is the way in which 20th century intellectuals managed to get Nazism labelled as "Rightist". This is however utter nonsense. Take this description of a political programme: A "declaration of war against the order of things which exist, against the state of things which exist, in a word, against the structure of the world which presently exists". You could hardly get a more change-oriented or revolutionary programme than that."
And here's a link to the article I excerpted
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID={4A711AA5-5283-4FFF-AC10-226D493CF542}
If you ask me the left is the modern home of racism and actually I can say that BJ Clinton's two mentors are prime examples of the mind set that Robert KKK Bird exemplifies. And if you want to call me out just take a look at the nice juicy quotes I will bring to the table that are part of the Civil Rights debates of the early 60's that your beloved Democrats served up. I dare you.
Duranty is dead, good riddance, but the Goddamned New York Times, to this day still lacks the common decency to even acknowledge their complicity even though with the fall of the Iron Curtain all the evidence poured forth.
Yet I watched for eight years as this filthy rag, this disgrace to journalism did cartwheels over BJ Clinton's phony baloney serial apologies, in someone else's name, for every injustice that he could dredge up that he thought he would score political points for apologizing (in someone else's name) for.
Unfortunately the common run of the mill Democrat voter is a sucker for cheap, crass and tawdry gimmickry such as this and that is why the Democrat Party has become what it is today, a party of race baiting klu kluxers in blue suites and ties instead of a white sheet.
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_Duranty)
Posted by: JDH on December 27, 2007 07:15 PMMaybe you should take up arms and fight the neo-facist leftist Govt. that you so fear. Make America your own, bring the proper sort of morality back to this country that we share. I imagine you to be sort of a right-wing American Taliban regulating all that is immoral. A land where we all happily worship the one true GOD as portrayed through his only son Jesus Christ (anything else will be summarily outlawed).
You can do it JDH, be a hero to GOD, Christ, and country by bringing the true form of Christianity back to the people. Yes, JDH you can bring the words "Merry Christmas" and "Amen" back to the lips of the people who now inhabit this once great nation.
But I will do more than simply state my contentions. I will attempt to measure them. One metric is the "ask and you shall receive" promise, whose chapter and verse also escapes me. I would like to read posts from those who did ask but didn't receive. Please be specific with respect to what was asked for, how often, and how earnestly. A second metric is the "First seek the kingdom of God, and all else shall be added unto you" promise. Who feels that their benefits are due to their Christianity? Again, specificity is greatly appreciated. I believe these metrics span the full spectrum of possibilities as to who got, who didn't get, and why.
Posted by: T.G. Dolando on December 27, 2007 09:26 PM"Matthew 21:22 And all things, whatsoever ye shall ask in prayer, believing, ye shall receive. Luke 11:9 And I say unto you, Ask, and it shall be given you; ..."
"Matthew 7:7 "Ask, and it will be given to you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you. (NASB ©1995)"
For understanding the context of what is meant:
See, http://www.crivoice.org/commanding.html
Keep in mind that theologians spend years studying the actual text to arrive at meaning and nuance. This is a general overview.
Posted by: WVH on December 27, 2007 10:02 PMAskandYouShallRecieve@AYSR.ORG
YourLord@YL.ORg
Or for the cyberclowns, KKK, Nazis, Aryan Nations, or the type of Paul supporter who flooded blogs after Medved published his open letter, God really does have your number.
"Duranty is dead, good riddance, but the Goddamned New York Times,..."
And YOU were preaching to 'imposter jesus', WOW, what a hypocrite!
What most people misname "communism" is left-wing socialism, and Naziism is the extreme socialism of the right. The acronym, USSR stood for "Union of Soviet SOCIALIST Republics." Hitler's Party was the National SOCIALIST Party.
Hillary and Obama and their ilk are moving us in the direction of left-wing socialism. GW Bush and the Neocons have moved us one step closer to right-wing socialism. Only those who want to limit government power and reduce government spending would move us in the direction of liberty, i.e. Free Minds and Free Markets.
I'm sure you know the only Presidential candidate who I think would move us in the direction of liberty... Ron Paul.
By the way, the USSR was not properly an example of communism. Examples of communes include the Israeli Kibbutz, Catholic monestaries, the hippy communal farm, and the American family. True communism is voluntary. You can leave at any time. It denies property rights, and is held together by some form of mission or the mutual affection of the members. I doubt that true communism can work in a group larger than about 30 people.
The USSR was not a form of communism. Lenin and Stalin used the term "communism" as a sort of marketing spin to sell their left-wing state socialism. But this was a form of Orwellian double-speak. I would never choose to join a commune other than that of my own family, but I have to defend the rights of others to form communes as long as they buy the land, do not force others to join or stay, and do not violate the rights of life, liberty and property of those outside their communes.
In short, I do not object that much to true, voluntary communism. I object to socialism, whether of the right (Naziism) or of the left. But America is heading in these directions alternately. This is not a contradiction, because the distinction between right and left-wing socialism is really very subtle. The only main difference between the two is racism. Both involve near-total state control. This is evil, and I don't care whether it is a Republican or a Democrat who is sending us in that direction. Right now it is both.
In the nature/nurture debate, Nazis assume that only nature counts. Your genetic background, according to them, determines all. Therefore they seek to exclude or exterminate those not of their race. The left-wing socialists assume it is all nurture. Therefore the ideal soviet person was thought to be made through education, propaganda and indoctrination. Kids are taken from their parents and raised by the state.
But neither nature nor nurture determines character. And the state will never have the information to decide how to run each individual life. The mere attempt violates our rights. So neither form of socialism makes sense. Only liberty is compatible with human nature. People tend to function best when free.
"You and I are told we must choose between a left or right, but I suggest there is no such thing as a left or right. There is only an up or down. Up to man's age-old dream -- the maximum of individual freedom consistent with order -- or down to the ant heap of totalitarianism." Ronald Reagan
Posted by: Bruce Guthrie on December 28, 2007 10:38 AMI have said no such thing, nor do I feel that I have implied it. I was sarcastically making fun of JDH. I may not agree with his views but I'm certainly NOT equating Christianity with the downfall of America.
I do however believe that the others holding the view of Christianity being the one true singular religion for a multi-religious society is a threat to American values. Christians are free to worship, pray, celebrate Christmas, but I fail to see any reason why the state should be sponsoring or advocating the practice of one religion over another.
"most countries throughout history have been de facto non-Christian, still they have benefited far more from the Christian principles embedded and brought to fruition in their laws, than the unbelievers in Muslim, Asian, and African polities throughout the ages."
I don't know about that. Lots of countries with different religions have similar laws. Asia is a prime example of this. Buddhism seems to work quite well for many countries there, as well as the teachings of Confucius. A lot of the Constitution and the Magna Carta were written to correct the injustices that were common under religious based Govt's such as Spain and England. In fact the first settlers fled here because they were persecuted for their religion by the English Govt. at the time. Seems to me this country flourished more than others under the Freedom of Religion than under the command of one that had it's roots invested in the state. Jews, Puritans, Muslims, Hindus, Amish, Atheists can all live side by side working together to pursure thier goals and dreams without fear of religious oppression from a fanatical religious state.
T.G. Dolando, I thank you for posing a sound and very rational argument in defense of your beliefs. I do believe JDH could learn a lot from a knowledgeable and religious person such as yourself.
Ummm, yeah. So you obviously hate the Amish with their funny hats and non-electric based style of living. They have a secular mindset that distances themselves from outsiders. They most certainly a minority population in this country because the number of people living in this manner are quite small. Are they part of the leftist/marxist cult that divides this country or they just a bunch of folks who choose to live a simpler lifestyle without the aid of modern invention?
"One can succeed without that mindset in this country, but it is infinitely more likely if one feels that they actually belong"
I'm guessing the Amish feel out of place in modern society, they don't know how to use the Internet, they don't use power tools, they live off the land and drive horse and buggy carriages instead of automobiles. Yet if you asked them, I'm sure many would say they are quite successful. In fact there's a huge demand in the modern world for their unique craftsmanship skills . A lot of Americans would love to own unique pieces of handcrafted furniture rather than some mass produced piece of furniture made in China and sold in bulk at cavernous warehouse store.
"This is by design and it is my impression that it is an ongoing goal of the Democrat Party to divide in order ti inculcate a sense if "disenfranchisement" that they can feed off of."
So the Democrats are working hand in hand with the evil Kwanzaa promoters to divide this country into singular groups. Once divided they can conquer America and impose their Marxist principles on us all? Is that what your saying here?
To the believer, all people are God's creation and therefore valuable. It follows then that all religions are of value. But I contend that all religions are not of equal value.
I will give a couple of examples as to why Christianity is to be valued above other religions.
1) Charity. Christianity stresses charity to the point of fault. In fact, excessive charity is (wrongly) enforced by law in most nations with a Christian herritage. Many modern fools believe that Social Welfare (Charity's technical name) was invented by the socialists. Charity is not as much of a valued virtue in non-Christian lands. India, the birthplace of Buddism, is a good case in point: widespread starvation is still accepted there as karma for the sins of a previous life. Indeed, the commodity of Charity is in such sort supply in India that the first Christian to show up, Mother Teresa, was able to coner the entire Indian charity market.
2) Equality. Again using India as an example, the dreaded cast system still operates in the open there. 2,000 years ago, Christians were told that the last shall be first and the first shall be last. And Paul writes in one of his epistles to the Christian owner of a runaway Christian slave that he and his slave are now brothers.
3) Hope. I will simply state as an axiom, without proof, that the virtue of Christian hope in a better future is unique to Christianity and is the reason for the upbeat and forward looking nature of the West which has resulted in a frothing, bubbling and always expanding economy with a constantly rising standard of living. It is true that China, India, and Japan are now expanding on a new wave of economic hope--But the West has shown them the way: they are emulating us, not leading us. And it stands to reason that a good God would not be so small as to contiually punish the other religions, but would let them participate in success, albeit to a lesser degee.
Posted by: T.G. Dolando on December 28, 2007 11:51 AM
Try this:
So the Democrats are working hand in hand with evil promoters to divide this country into singular groups. Once divided they can conquer America and impose their secular progressive principles on us all?
That's much better.
Posted by: NW Denizen on December 28, 2007 11:53 AMThat's not what you stated in your original point. You said it was "anything and anybody whose goal it is to inculcate a separatist mindset". Well I gave you an perfectly good example and you are already dismissing it because they don't vote Democrat? This rationale seems like a real flimsy excuse on your part. Seems that most Amish in this country don't even vote, so how could you tell if they are Democrats or Republicans?
"I can tell you this, envy is a big part of what the Democrat Party feeds on."
You can, got any evidence to support that theory? I think the Democratic party wants to legislate compassion for their fellow man. Universal Health Care is the idea of making Health Care available to everyone regardless of race, creed, color, religion. What's the universal theme on the GOP side, illegal immigration. In fact Romney criticized Huckabee for allowing illegal immigrants to gain scholarships to Universities. Should we not be encouraging illegal immigrants to pull themselves up by their bootstraps and follow the American Dream and become productive members of society? Granted this is a very selective (and biased) example, but which side is trying to be more inclusive here?
It's quite obvious you are not capable of rational thought. Until you can defend your points with decent argument and not resort to buzzword one liner conspiracy theories I will obviously have to converse with someone more sane and educated person such as T.G. Dolando.
Thanks for the good times,
TSIB
I think that's what they want YOU to think. I don't believe the Demcrats give a damn about anything but getting themselves elected. It is not what one says, it is what one does that counts.
Compassion my ass. That's why they turn murderers and child rapists loose on our streets and refuse to enforce our laws. It sure as hell isn't because they have compassion for the victims. They could care less. Ask Michael Dukakis if he had compassion for the victims of Willie Horton. He wouldn't even talk to them.
From Andrew Johnson to the present it has been and still is Democrats who espouse racism. Perhaps you remember Orval Faubus, George Wallace, William Fulbright, and Lester Maddox to name a few. Democrat Franklin Roosevelt locked up Japanese Americans during World War II. From Ted Rall calling Condoleesa Rice "Bush's house nigga" to Hillary implying that all people from India run gas stations it does not take a very deep look to see the soul of the Democrat party. The only compassion Dems have for blacks it to keep them down and feed them enough bullshit so that they will keep voting Democrat. Oh, do not get me started.
You have advanced a case that I am tending to agree with in as much as the case is made that my statement regarding persons "whose goal it is to inculcate a separatist mindset" does not square with the case I have made, but it is simply because I cast my net a little wide and caught not only Amish, Hutterites, Mennonites, Shakers, monks and nuns in monestaries and convents and other groups who have made a conscious decision to withdraw from society.
So I will give you that you have given me a reason to take a look at some of my thought and develope it further.
Now let me ask you this question: are you afraid to debate based upon what I have said? Is that why you took this excerpt (there is a significant difference between the Amish and other religious groups) out of context from the sentence it was contained in? The statement I made was: but can start by saying that there is a significant difference between the Amish and other religious groups, that is a difference in kind, and any of the groups that make up the Democrat constituency.
Posted by: JDH on December 28, 2007 01:59 PMPeace!
Jesus Rodrigues
Posted by: Jesus on December 28, 2007 03:21 PMGee, it makes one wonder if Kwanzaa brings back the joyous memories of smiling children cavorting in Liberia?
Well the Seattle P.I. thinks its important enough to waste column inches on so I guess I shouldn't question it...
After all Karenga is a Professor don't you know?!?!
Posted by: juandos on December 28, 2007 03:47 PMBeliever@spiritualgrowth.org
Now, that is a phony e-mail address. Yahoo, hotmail and google offer free e-mail addresses. I use yahoo. People have actually contacted me using my e-mail address. People know my true identity and I use my real initials. If you monitor the posts, many of the truly offensive ones come from phony e-mail addresses.
For groups that do monitor the activities of Nazis, KKK, and Aryan Nation types, one of the MOs for blogging activity is the phoney e-mail address. Does that answer your question?
Posted by: WVH on December 28, 2007 03:50 PMWow...anybody who actually believes this is a cretin.
Posted by: Shank on December 28, 2007 04:39 PMYeah and by folks from the Democratic Underground, the Democratic party, ACORN, and other groups that routinely try to fraudulently win elections...
Posted by: juandos on December 28, 2007 05:00 PMNow I posted links above and I will consider any objections you have to the writings, but the material is factual and relies on documentation from the original source's writings. I will defer to what the source said, in it's greater context on a case by case basis but they all jive with today's leftist/progressive mind set as articulated in today's writings.
Posted by: JDH on December 28, 2007 05:02 PMSound familiar? The last time I checked William F Buckley has not espoused these sentiments. In fact if you do a Nexus Lexus search you will find this very rhetoric, or parts of it, being spouted by every leftist group at the forefront of today's national political debate. This is a dangerous road to head down, history has shown it to lead to racial genocide every time it has been traveled. There is absolutely no reason to further experiment with this dangerous philosophy other than if one has no interest in mitigating human suffering and misery.
Posted by: JDH on December 28, 2007 05:30 PMSee my post @ 121.
The right needs to aknowledge that increasing government power is socialistic, even if Republicans are the ones doing it.
Posted by: Bruce Guthrie on December 28, 2007 08:45 PMYou, like me, have no proof conclusively where the postings are coming from. That is the ponint of the phony e-mail addresses. There is a standard MO among individuals supporting racists groups. Most "progressives" here actually use identifers, they post, take their lumps and continue to post.
ACORN is more into manufacturing voter registrations.
So, whining, I think not. Go check some the more sophisticated hate sites. Just as you feel there is a concerted effort among "progressives" check out the election campaign of David Duke against Edwards for governor of Louisiana. There is more of an effort to mainstream hate groups than there is for some left wing looney to feel that a few postings on a conservative site will help them. The KKK wants to be mainstream and they want to appeal to the 20-35 demo by appearing to be libertarian and for smaller government. The racist message is more like soft core porn.
Posted by: WVH on December 28, 2007 09:20 PMOne more thing I forgot to add. Increasingly hate groups are using the new public square of blogs. It is not so important to track their name, but e-amil addresses are crucial for tracking. They know that. There is evolving law in forcing providers like yahoo, hotmail, and gmail to divulge identity. This is one example of the evolving law:
Police blotter: Judge orders Gmail disclosure
In case over missing assets, judge orders "all e-mails" from a Gmail account, including deleted ones, to be turned over.
By Declan McCullagh
Staff Writer, CNET News.com
Published: March 17, 2006, 4:00 AM PST
TalkBackE-mailPrint del.icio.us Digg this
"Police blotter" is a weekly News.com report on the intersection of technology and the law.
What: In a lawsuit brought by the Federal Trade Commission, a subpoena is sent to Google for the complete contents of a Gmail account, including deleted e-mail messages. This is unrelated to the Department of Justice's own subpoena to Google for search terms and excerpts from its search database.
When: U.S. Magistrate Judge Elizabeth Laporte in San Francisco ruled on Jan. 31 and March 13.
Outcome: Judge grants subpoena and orders that all e-mail messages, including deleted ones, be divulged.
http://www.news.com/2100-1047_3-6050295.html
I know that Stefan has on occasion tracked the identity of an individual.
On the public blog, in order to post, one has to have a valid e-mail address. I don't know about the cost factor. Maybe there should be validation of e-mail addresses in order to post. Should an individual or individual(s) be involved in a larger enterprise that steps over the law, there would be some assistance to law enforcement.
Posted by: WVH on December 29, 2007 09:16 AMWhat perpetuates blogging are:
1. Good investigation like here and Little Greenfootballs
2. Great ideas and conversation like here and Huffington, Lucianne and others.
Lucianne has had registration for years and I don't see that it has stiflied free tought.
You still have your moniker, do you need to hide behind a sheet, I mean an annoymous e-mail?
Posted by: WVH on December 29, 2007 03:01 PMAll I said was that Hitler is at the exreme right. I think that is pretty uncontroversial. I also extended kudos to you for pointing out that Hitler was a socialist. You are absolutely right.
But to call my party racist, and by extension to call me racist, is really not civil, and not compatible with conservatism. It is a form of guilt by association, and therefore invalid. You make yourself (or JDH, who's signature you use) look bad through such uncivil attacks.
Just to be explicit, I think racism in private matters is disgusting, and in government matters it is a violation of the principle of our equal, individual rights. I'm sure that the vast majority of Libertarians will agree with me on this issue.
Posted by: Bruce Guthrie on December 29, 2007 04:13 PMSo, does Ron Paul plan to answer Medved's letter and does he plan to give back money from Nazis, Aryan Nations or KKK types or at least donate the money to a worthy group like the Salvation Army?
Does Paul plan to condemn the activities of groups like the Nazis, Aryan Nations, and KKK?
Since you are the go-to-guy on Paul has he ever made a statement like:
"Just to be explicit, I think racism in private matters is disgusting, and in government matters it is a violation of the principle of our equal, individual rights. I'm sure that the vast majority of Libertarians will agree with me on this issue...."
If so, can you or Benton post the statement?
Yes it is me and YES I did label the Democrat Party as a RACIST PARTY and I stand by it.
I'll tell you what really chars my butt, and that is to be one of the few on the right that was willing to take on the serial labeling of anyone from the right as racist when no one else was willing to defend themselves and to actually give it back in spades.
I do this backed up by solid evidence and I will not back away from what I do in this regard.
So the Republican Party is painted with the broad brush of racism when one Republican belongs to a segregated club, compare that to the positive advancement of racism by Robert Bird and BJ Clinton's two mentors. And that is just three, of many, contemporary examples, would you like me to scorch your ears with quotes, from these three lovely souls, that are part of the public record? Well would you? I can do it, believe me.
These are people who were not on the fringe of the Democrat Party, they were/are the leaders.
Or how about a few from, Hymie Town Jackson's repertoire and he is as welcome to share the stage at the Democrat NATIONAL CONVENTION as anyone. Sharpton's remarks are also part of the public record and on and on and on. How about I air a few of them today? It is a record of race vs race that is disgraceful, to say the least.
What is more, it is continual and everlasting.
Now shall we examine some of the "scholarly" writings of some of the gender baiting feminists who have climbed to the top rung of the Democrat ladder? I can do that too and it isn't pretty.
You show me where an open bigot is in a contemporary Republican leadership roll if you want to advance the case for institutionalized bigotry within the Republican Party as well.
Republicans don't tolerate bigots, they shun and marginalize them as was done with David Duke.
Any documented former KKK activity is enough to disqualify a Republican from National leadership, period end of story.
Now belonging to the KKK or a radical feminist organization that actively promotes bigotry is, by definition, taking an active roll. Is it not? This is simply unacceptable, but it is not only overlooked within the Democrat Party, these people are rewarded with leadership positions.
As I alluded to above, I have watched Republicans loose leadership positions over such things as casual remarks that were in no way designed to inflame or even offend. All the while the Democrats give Planned Parenthood (Google Margret Sanger) a platform and ovations. My God man, look at what that organization's organizing principals and objectives were. They are part of the public record, do it.
So yes - I stand by the statement that a Party that is absolutely crawling with people and groups that have a history of publicly promoting ACTIVELY AGGRESSIVE BIGOTRY can be fairly defined as a racist Party.
I won't back down on this one.
Posted by: JDH on December 29, 2007 05:25 PMPlease people, get a life; start your new year off by weaning yourselves off the computer.
Enjoy each day as if it might be your last, cause one day it will be.
A Happy & Healthful New Year to you all!
Posted by: Simon on December 29, 2007 09:03 PMBloggers who ask questions about the Paul campaign and the support that it gets from Nazis, Aryan Nations, and the KKK get scathing personal attacks;
1. Ron Paul and His KKK, White Supremacist, and Neo-Nazi Supporters
Written by SJ Reidhead
Published November 27, 2007
See also:
»The White Supremacist Challenge to Senator Lindsey Graham
During the past month or so the conservative blogsphere and media has finally discovered the fact that GOP Presidential hopeful and Texas GOP Congressman Ron Paul has some very strange supporters.
http://blogcritics.org/archives/2007/11/27/011749.php
After his post, he described the attacks:
Attack of the Ron Paul Bots
by SJ Reidhead at 08:55AM (MST) on November 27, 2007 | Permanent Link | Cosmos
BLOG CRITICS UNDER ATTACK
Because of my current article about Ron Paul, that is up on Blog Critics, they are under the usual attack. The good thing about this is the RP people are exposing themselves to the world, the same way the ultra right did yesterday over my BC article on Buddy Witherspoon.
thepinkflamingo.blogharbor.com/blog/_archives/2007/11/27/3378306.html
2. Michael Medved posted an open letter to Ron Paul.
Here is the link with the letter text and what happened afterwards:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/11/the_ron_paul_campaign_and_its.html
I wonder if one person using different monikers is operating at this site?
Posted by: WVH on December 30, 2007 10:57 AMWVH, maybe it's time to move on since your obvioulsy not making any headway with Bruce and Travis.
What's the differnce between the KKK and Tom Tancredo? The KKK hide thier faces behind white sheets.
No, I don't hate, but you do. Obviously, I am on target, aren't I?
Let's see, your e-mail address is:
wvhisanidiot@hotmail.com
So, like other Paul critics, I am assume I am targeted for the hate campaign. Oh, by the way greetings cyberstalker. Hope that you had a
MERRY CHRISTMAS.
Posted by: WVH on December 30, 2007 11:58 AMNo. It is nowhere near a checkmate. Comparing Ron Everett to Christ, and the Black Panther Party to the Amish is ridiculous on the face of it.
Posted by: NW Denizen on December 31, 2007 11:54 AM
They, in taking PART of one sentence out of context, setting up a straw man and then using same, they actually did point out a hole in my line of reasoning.
Even though a stopped clock is correct twice per day that clock does not get to be admired as a "a perfectly accurate timekeeper - but only twice per day." That being said I will give them that they have pointed out (stumbled onto it) a hole in my argument that needs patching. It is a slow leak in an otherwise sound tire though.
The problem with debating the left is that they run to "moral relativity" when cornered and recognize no objective standard of right and wrong. This serves to frustrate my reasoning, but I can work around it by reminding myself of concrete examples wherein they have painted themselves into a corner with reliance on that tactic.
Let's just consider one of the darlings of the left and his statements in the public record and how the Democrat Party responded.
Leonard Jeffries was quoted in the New York Times saying that "rich Jews who financed the development of Europe also financed the slave trade." The New York Post quoted him lecturing that Jews controlled the slave trade, and that they use their control of Hollywood to promote the subservience of blacks in the modern day.
This is not only demonstrably historically incorrect it was designed to inflame racial animosities. There is no way anyone can dance around that.
I can give documented examples wherein almost every leftist organization tried to pull his fat from the fire on that speech but only dug a deeper hole by exposing the acceptance and toleration within their ranks of extreme racial bigotry when they tried that tack.
Try as they might, the complete contents of that speech simply left them with accepting "Jeffries the racist hate monger is welcome in the Democrat Party," in the publics' eye. Although some of them tossed Jeffries over the side, by and large this was not the case.
Jeffries also caused controversy in 1991 when he said that the 1986 Challenger Space Shuttle disaster was "the best thing to happen to America in a long time," as it would stop white people from "spreading their filth through the universe."
Good Lord man, there are a lot of blacks that worked on the space program and I further defy anyone to find anything in the public record that anyone had what he implies in mind.
Jeffries and his ilk are still "players" in Democrat politics, that tells us something about the Party and what it will embrace. Does it not?
The problem I am working through is separation from the culture at large in the "Amish" case vs the Jeffries case and how to separate one from the other and define it.
US Supreme Court Justice, JUSTICE POTTER STEWART, put my dilemma into perspective when he concurred in the obscenity case stating "It is possible to read the Court's opinion in Roth v. United States and Alberts v. California, 354 U.S. 476, in a variety of ways. In saying this, I imply no criticism of the Court, which in those cases was faced with the task of trying to define what may be indefinable." and "I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced within that shorthand description; and perhaps I could never succeed in intelligibly doing so. But I know it when I see it..."
I think a reasonable man standard can be applied in drawing a line between those groups and individuals whose message is one of separatism based upon racist hate and groups that choose to live cloistered or semi-cloistered in order to be "closer to God." Their's, Amish etc, is a separatism designed to insulate them from worldly distractions in pursuing their faith. Now how to draw a line between this and a separatism based upon racial, gender and other differences that has devolved into a message of hate.
BUT, the dilemma I have is that there is open hate mongering that does go on within some of the religious groups that are active within the Republican ranks, and yes these groups have risen within the ranks. So, yes they have me caught between a rock and a hard place here because I have taken their example and "run it out." Let's be fair and acknowledge that and give them credit where credit is due. I have a problem that I may not be able to resolve.
The difference that I am exploring - is to examine the response when overt racists either are exposed or expose themselves. One of the problem I have is that Republican racist groups/individuals do exist within the Party and are in leadership positions. I think it may boil down to acceptance vs embrace and where the line is crossed.
Now, the difference I see as fruitful, and am exploring, is that the Republicans do not run for the "moral relativity" veil to hide behind and try to "explain away" the overtly racist views as something to be expected because ...,you name the injustice, and then expect the Party to embrace and run with that excuse. When there is no objective standard anymore then anything can be "explained away." If "blacks can't be racist" then Jeffries' views are not racist.
I have a standard I apply, but Democrats have redefined racism in a way that I can not intellectually accept. The dilemma is that when it is not a person cannot be a racist based upon his views, as stated in the public record, if he is a member of a "protected class," it makes things impossible. Damn near the entire Democrat Party constituency has come up with a grievance that allows them "protected" status, in their minds, and are therefore above reproach (in their minds).
So I have two problems a)there are racist groups within the Republican ranks that are accepted and b)there is a difference in kind between the continual and everlasting, unapologetic, on the record, race baiting etc of the groups that Democrats will tolerate.
I think that on "b" I can make my case with quotes taken from the public record and how Democrats circle the wagons around the perps. "a" is a little more pernicious a problem though. I see a difference in how Republicans tolerate these groups, but not a wide enough difference to make a statement that is worth a hill of beans though. Actually, the difference isn't even one that has meaning to me.
All of this is an academic exercise though, the meat and potatoes is, which political philosophy, when taken as a whole, offers ALL Americans the best shot at realizing the American Dream. The personal responsibility philosophy wherein the opportunity is all that is guaranteed or the redistribution philosophy that promises (but never delivers) equality of outcome.
Getting back to Kwanzaa, it is based upon Marxist philosophy and I see it as a plank in a platform meant to further divide the races in a way that is destructive.
Posted by: JDH on December 31, 2007 08:06 PMSure we have them, but when they bring active racism into the public forum the Republican recognizes it as such and ACTIVELY STATES why it should be considered what it is. Racism is racism, despite the left's deflections from the attitude of looking to an underlying cause to mitigate it. On the mainstream right we recognize it as fitting with time honored definition and seek to marginalize (and subsequently STAMP IT OUT).
I'm talking the mainstream right, not the "win at any cost right" that looks the other way. The mainstream right wants to win, don't get me wrong, but racism, Please. The win at any cost (and these guys are supporting us ergo...) just doesn't, and will not wash amongst people who hold an objective view of right and wrong. So there you have it.
Those from the right (particularly the religious right that are the rightful heirs to the abolitionist wing of the Republican Party's founding principals will not go along with what the "let's just win and get a governing majority) will not tolerate racism and seek to explain itaway. You go ahead and Google it up and see that the Republican mainstream stands for an absolutely unbiased equality of opportunity and will not sell their soul to the Devil for political power if it means that some are left out because of bigotry.
That is not saying that given Rudy vs whoever they would not vote Rudy. But that and any other viable candidate as a choice it will be a wash on that issue, at that point other considerations will rule theday. They will vote based upon what he represents on an objective scale and when it is added up, in the totality, this issue will "cancel out." Leaving them the choice between someone who is more likely to foster the remainder of their agenda.
Voting for a non viable candidate is a sucker play, at best. They will support him, if it comes to that. And while some among the "win at any cost faction" will mainstream his views amongst the rank and file, by explaining away his views or concocting a scenario by which his views on abortion are consistent with their principals it will not be accepted and put forth as consistent with theirs on this issue. They will tolerate him, but they will not explain away this matter.
Oppose this with the Democrats who seek to explain away active racist comments that are in the public record. You can explain them away, but that does NOTHING to make them consistent with the Democrat rhetoric and that objectively defines the Democratic Party a party that opposes racism FUNDAMENTALLY. Racism is racism, PERIOD, in my mind, I don't care about why you hold those views, PERIOD, and no amount of justification can change that. The Republican mainstream does not tolerate it and the Democrat mainstream seeks ways to explain it away.
Racism espoused by Jeffries, Sharpton or Hymie Town are examples of RACISM and when a Party rank and file accepts the strategy of let's "dance around the issue" they have co opted those views as their own.
People are smart enough to know the difference between overlooking something (especially when the alternative is equal on that issue) and accepting the mainstreaming of those views in the interest of political power, for me to stand by my assessment and to further develop my argument now.
Posted by: JDH on December 31, 2007 11:52 PM