14
Oct

Obama Funded Anti-American, Afrocentric, Schools

Posted by: Curt @ 8:34 am in Barack Obama  | 19 views

Stanley Kurtz writes in a new article that Wright was just the tip of the iceberg for Obama. Oh sure, he attended his sermons but he also sent a lot of money to education programs and schools that taught almost exclusively the anti-American, Afrocentric, ideology preached by Wright.

John McCain, take note. Obama’s tie to Wright is no longer a purely personal question (if it ever was one) about one man’s choice of his pastor. The fact that Obama funded extremist Afrocentrists who shared Wright’s anti-Americanism means that this is now a matter of public policy, and therefore an entirely legitimate issue in this campaign.

Stanley Kurtz then goes on to detail his findings from the Annenberg documents. Findings such as the fact that the group funded the “South Shore African Village Collaborative.” A thoroughly “Afrocentric” institution that used teacher-training, curriculum advice, and community involvement to improve academic performance in the schools it worked with.

The South Shore African Village Collaborative was deeply involved in the “rites of passage movement,” which started in the 90’s. They set up whole curriculum’s centered around the the “rites of passage” ceremonies.

What exactly is the “rites of passage movement?” Kurtz:

To learn what the rites of passage movement was all about, we can turn to a sympathetic 1992 study published in the Journal of Negro Education by Nsenga Warfield-Coppock. In that article, Warfield-Coppock bemoans the fact that public education in the United States is shaped by “capitalism, competitiveness, racism, sexism and oppression.” According to Warfield-Coppock, these American values “have confused African American people and oriented them toward American definitions of achievement and success and away from traditional African values.” American socialization has “proven to be dysfuntional and genocidal to the African American community,” Warfield-Coppock tells us. The answer is the adolescent rites of passage movement, designed “to provide African American youth with the cultural information and values they would need to counter the potentially detrimental effects of a Eurocentrically oriented society.”

The adolescent rites of passage movement that flowered in the 1990s grew out of the “cultural nationalist” or “Pan-African” thinking popular in radical black circles of the 1960s and 1970s. The attempt to create a virtually separate and intensely anti-American black social world began to take hold in the mid-1980s in small private schools, which carefully guarded the contents of their controversial curricula. Gradually, through external partners like CIESS, the movement spread to a few public schools. Supporters view these programs as “a social and cultural ‘inoculation’ process that facilitates healthy, African-centered development among African American youth and protects them against the ravages of a racist, sexist, capitalist, and oppressive society.”

We know that SSAVC was part of this movement, not only because their Annenberg proposals were filled with Afrocentric themes and references to “rites of passage,” but also because SSAVC’s faculty set up its African-centered curriculum in consultation with some of the most prominent leaders of the “rites of passage movement.” For example, a CIESS teacher conference sponsored a presentation on African-centered curricula by Jacob Carruthers, a particularly controversial Afrocentrist.

Google Carruthers and you will find that the guy is a fanatic who believes the true birthplace of our civilization is ancient Kemet in Egypt.

Carruthers’s key writings are collected in his book, Intellectual Warfare. Reading it is a wild, anti-American ride. In his book, we learn that Carruthers and his like-minded colleagues have formed an organization called the Association for the Study of Classical African Civilizations (ASCAC), which takes as its mission the need to “dismantle the European intellectual campaign to commit historicide against African peoples.” Carruthers includes “African-Americans” within a group he would define as simply “African.” When forced to describe a black person as “American,” Carruthers uses quotation marks, thus indicating that no black person can be American in any authentic sense. According to Carruthers, “The submission to Western civilization and its most outstanding offspring, American civilization, is, in reality, surrender to white supremacy.”

Carruthers’s goal is to use African-centered education to recreate a separatist universe within America, a kind of state-within-a-state. The rites of passage movement is central to the plan.

Even nuttier, Carruthers believes that blacks who have become Americanized were actually raped. They may have been forcibly exposed to American culture but do not need to accept it.

The better option, says Carruthers, is to separate out and relearn the wisdom of Africa’s original Kemetic culture, embodied in the teachings of the ancient wise man, Ptahhotep (an historical figure traditionally identified as the author of a Fifth Dynasty wisdom book). Anything less than re-Africanization threatens the mental, and even physical, genocide of Africans living in an ineradicably white supremacist United States.

Check out the kind of training Carruther’s gave to teachers at his schools:

According to Chicago Annenberg Challenge records, Carruthers’s training session on African-centered curricula for SSAVC teachers was a huge hit: “As a consciousness raising session, it received rave reviews, and has prepared the way for the curriculum readiness survey….” These teacher-training workshops were directly funded by the Chicago Annenberg Challenge. Another sure sign of the ideological cast of SSAVC’s curriculum can be found in Annenberg documents noting that SSAVC students are taught the wisdom of Ptahhotep. Carruthers’s concerns about “menticide” and “genocide” at the hand of America’s white supremacist system seem to be echoed in an SSAVC document that says: “Our children need to understand the historical context of our struggles for liberation from those forces that seek to destroy us.”

So now we know the types of schools and teaching that was funded by Annenberg. But how does this tie into Wright and Obama? Well, take a guess who was given the opportunity to speak at the Trinity Church:

When Jeremiah Wright turned toward African-centered thinking in the late 1980s and early 1990s (the period when, attracted by Wright’s African themes, Barack Obama first became a church member), many prominent thinkers from Carruthers’s Association for the Study of Classical African Civilizations were invited to speak at Trinity United Church of Christ, Carruthers himself included. We hear echoes of Carruthers’s work in Wright’s distinction between “right brained” Africans and “left brained” Europeans, in Wright’s fears of U.S. government-sponsored genocide against American blacks, and in Wright’s embittered attacks on America’s indelibly white-supremacist history. In Wright’s Trumpet Newsmagazine, as in Carruthers’s own writings, blacks are often referred to as “Africans living in the diaspora” rather than as Americans.

When Asa Hillard died, speaker and writer of such books as “Teachings of Ptahhotep: The Oldest Book in the World,” “The Maroon Within Us,” “SBA: The Reawakening of the African Mind,” and “African Power”, Wright delivered the eulogy to a crowd of prominent members of the Carruthers group “Association for the Study of Classical African Civilizations.” He put her picture on the front of his Church’s magazine and a picture of Farrakhan on the back.

Perhaps inadvertently, Wright’s eulogy for Hilliard actually established the fringe nature of his favorite African-centered scholars. In his tribute, Wright stressed how intensely “white Egyptologists recoiled at the very notion of everything Asa taught.” As Wright himself made plain, it seems virtually impossible to find respectable scholars of any political stripe who approve of the extremist anti-American version of Afrocentrism promoted by Hilliard and Carruthers.

To top it all off we have Bill Ayers and his wife Bernardine Dohrn planning to release a book in 2009 called the “Race Course Against White Supremacy.” It will be published by Third World Press which was set up by Carruthers and “Association for the Study of Classical African Civilizations.”

So now we know that the Annenberg Challenge funded fringe schools that taught blacks to fear the white man, to fear being Americanized, and embrace being anything but an American. We know that these Afrocentric ideas went from Carruthers schools to the lips of Wright at his church attended by Obama AND we know the terrorist pal of Obama, Bill Ayers, is writing a book about race to be published by the nut Carruthers.

But does Obama buy into this Afrocentric way of thinking?

…in 1995, the same year Obama assumed control of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, he publicly rejected “the unrealistic politics of integrationist assimilation,” a stance that clearly resonates with both Wright and Carruthers.

And as noted, Wright had invited Carruthers, Hilliard, and like-minded thinkers to address his Trinity congregants. Wright likes to tick off his connections to these prominent Afrocentrists in sermons, and Obama would surely have heard of them. Reading over SSAVC’s Annenberg proposals, Obama could hardly be ignorant of what they were about. And if by some chance Obama overlooked Hilliard’s or Carruthers’s names, SSAVC’s proposals are filled with references to “rites of passage” and “Ptahhotep,” dead giveaways for the anti-American and separatist ideological concoction favored by SSAVC.

We know that Obama did read the proposals. Annenberg documents show him commenting on proposal quality.

Kurtz concludes:

However he may seek to deny it, all evidence points to the fact that, from his position as board chair of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, Barack Obama knowingly and persistently funded an educational project that shared the extremist and anti-American philosophy of Jeremiah Wright. The Wright affair was no fluke. It’s time for McCain to say so.

Obama has dismissed any allegation that he buys into these teachings but we now have evidence that he not only attended the church that centered around this stuff, he helped fund them also.

And this man is just a breath away from the White House…..

  • Share/Bookmark
Print This Post Print This Post
This entry was posted on Tuesday, October 14th, 2008 at 8:34 am and is filed under Barack Obama. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Trackbacks

  1. Obama In Wisconsin 8th Grade School Books | BigMouthFrog

124 comments so far

 1Reply to this comment  

The New Theme Song for Obama followers:

http://www.nextgenerationcorp.com/NextGenBlog/

October 14th, 2008 at 8:43 am
Hard Right
 2Reply to this comment  

Gee, I’m shocked………not at all.

October 14th, 2008 at 8:47 am
 3Reply to this comment  

It would be nice if McCain brought this up at the last debate but we know he won’t. He’s been neutered by Cong. John Lewis who warned him that any criticism of Obama’s radical anti-American associations is “playing with fire.”

Free speech is now the exclusive right of liberals.

October 14th, 2008 at 9:54 am
ThomNJ
 4Reply to this comment  

So who can prove that Ptahhotep was even a black man? Maybe he was semitic or greek or some other line of mankind. Afterall, Egypt was ruled by many different people, some white, some black.

My response to the statement, “these American values “have confused African American people and oriented them toward American definitions of achievement and success and away from traditional African values” is to say, in my sarcastic way, you mean that the founding fathers and the rest of all those who colonized America should have willingly adopted African values? And pray tell, what were those, specifically, at that time? Assuming there was a single set of African values then, as well as now, what are they, and who – what country or tribe – embodies them in Africa (after all, we need to look at an example in order to measure how well it is working).

Fundamentally, that kind of rationale would mean that ANYONE who even willingly moves to another country is not bound to assimilate into the society there. That kind of rationale is one of the things wrong with the world and now with our country. Instead of requiring people to become Americans, as our founding fathers desired, we have degenerated into darn near requiring people to become some kind of romanticized version of what the individual THINKS his or her ancestors were at some independently chosen time in history. What kind of Irish/Welsh/English/German should I pretend to be and what percentage of the values in existence in those representative lands should I choose and for what epoch in history? Good Heavens, what if I don’t know my ancestry? How the heck do I figure out how to behave?

October 14th, 2008 at 10:22 am
 5Reply to this comment  

Fabulous analysis of Kurtz’s article, Curt. As I’ve said repeatedly, the Obama-Ayers-Annenberg Challenge-socialism link is all about his designs on education in US public schools. It most certainly is an issue that should be broached. And McCain *should* be going there.

Will he? Hard to say. But this election really comes down not to DNC v GOP, or liberal/progressive v conservative. This November, Americans choose between socialism and capitalism.

October 14th, 2008 at 10:42 am
RgularJoe
 6Reply to this comment  

And what is wrong with wanting to teach a child about their origin and to appreciate and understand the communal ways of Africans and their ancestors. Its crazy to believe that everything about America is right and correct. It’s even far more ludicrous to condemn a person as anti-American, when for the longest time we were not considered citizens of this country. Afro-centricism is purely to pursuit to know thyself. To reconnect from where we came. You may not notice it because most history books used in public schools reflect a one-sided view of history, but there are many more perspectives from which to learn about the history of the world.

In grammar school I learned Latin, but was never taught that Egypt pre-dated Rome and many of the great scholars of Rome studied in Egypt. Never was I taught about the mathematical wonder that is the Pyramid of Giza. No one apoke about Africans crossing the Atlantic pre-columbus or the Spanish Moors. No one taught us in-depth about Ethiopia, or Mali, or Marcus Garvey & Liberia. These are reasons to help raise the self-esteem of young impressionable minds that only see reflections of themselves in very limited ways in school history books. We see only a very select number of people to have left an indelible impact on this world throughout the long history of this world. That is unacceptable.

It is not anti-american to speak out or stand against the status quo. In fact it is very American to do so. the founing fathers were all traitors against the crown, yet we celebrate them for the outspoken, anti-England rhetoric that gaveway to all of the fundamental values that you cherish today. Remember, it was anarchist that revolted against the country that funded their exploration & occupation of a foreign land that gaveway to America.

So you can’t have it both ways. You can’t condemn and ridicule people that are only following in the path first cleared the same people you celebrate as heros. When you do that it is seen as a double standard and possibly tinged with a bit of bigotry.

October 14th, 2008 at 12:39 pm
RgularJoe
 7Reply to this comment  

@ThomNJ:

Wow…so give up your individuality to become what. American? America is in fact a collection of tribes that descended upon this land in hopes of fame & fortune. It the promise that you can be and become who and what you wish that has allowed America to prosper for so long. To never become stagnant, to push forward through ignorance, arrogance, and even plain stupidity. This is what America is…any reversal of course will doom this country to the same fate that befell Egypt, Greece, Rome, England, and so forth.

America’s engine is greased by the ideas…that is the real capital that built capitalism. Vision, innovatiion, & creativity can not be bought, but it can be sold. The synthesization of the values & know how of various cultures & tribes brought us Jazz, Gumbo, democracy, and countless other innovations that we consider “American”

October 14th, 2008 at 1:15 pm
 8Reply to this comment  

Umm Regular Joe. What the hell are you talking about. Where thehell did you got to school thatdid not teach youa bout Egypt and Africa???? That is truly amazing. You never took a Social Studies class in school???? If not how the hell did you graduate???

Sorry for being blunt, but that was one of the stupidest comments I have ever seen.

And this is not about learning your own culture, whch schools should not teach anyway, that is what family is for. It was teaching Black Liberation Theology and some crack pot histories that has been thoroughly dicredited.

Remember we are suppossed to be a MeltingPot, not a bunch of Indetity Political pawns.

If more people think like you do, I am afraid of what our country will become

October 14th, 2008 at 1:37 pm
 9Reply to this comment  

But of course it’s American to speak out against the status quo, RJoe (#6 post). But that’s not the point.

I believe you miss the issue of just what was that curriculum. You’re interpreting it as some passive review of history and culture. Let’s try again in a shortened, more to the point, recap.

The SSCAV received grant funds from the Obama/Ayers CAC to promote educational reform for social and economic justice… a shared pet cause by both Obama and Ayers. And a cause that is rooted in Karl Marx and Rosa Luxemberg.

The SSCAV curriculum was based on the program by Afrocentrist, Jacob Carruthers.

When forced to describe a black person as “American,” Carruthers uses quotation marks, thus indicating that no black person can be American in any authentic sense. According to Carruthers, “The submission to Western civilization and its most outstanding offspring, American civilization, is, in reality, surrender to white supremacy.”

~~~

Carruthers sees enemies on every part of the political spectrum, from conservatives, to liberals, to academic leftists, all of whom reject advocates of Kemetic civilization, like himself, as dangerous and academically irresponsible extremists. Carruthers sees all these groups as deluded captives of white supremacist Eurocentric culture. Therefore the only safe place for Africans living in the United States (i.e. American blacks) is outside the mental boundaries of our ineradicably racist Eurocentric civilization. As Carruthers puts it: “…some of us have chosen to reject the culture of our oppressors and recover our disrupted ancestral culture.”

And what is Carruthers vision of history?

Like other leaders of the rites of passage movement, Carruthers teaches that the true birthplace of world civilization was ancient “Kemet” (Egypt), from which Kemetic philosophy supposedly spread to Africa as a whole. Carruthers and his colleagues believe that the values of Kemetic civilization are far superior to the isolating and oppressive, ancient Greek-based values of European and American civilization.

Although academic Egyptologists and anthropologists strongly reject these historical claims, Carruthers dismisses critics as part of a white supremacist conspiracy to hide the truth of African superiority.

Well, it’s interesting that this academic can be so certain. His personal theory has many flaws, as noted by the changed our view of how classic Egyptian civilization emerged.

Now, our knowledge of the culture of early dynastic Egypt has also changed our view of how classic Egyptian civilization emerged. As little as sixty years ago, and even today among some popular theorists, the dynastic Egypt we know appears to have suddenly sprang from a a cultural vacuum. However, like the pyramids themselves that evolved through experimentation, sometimes resulting in failures, over many years, likewise, today we can appreciate the long gestation of Egyptian culture, and the fact that its roots lie firmly within Egypt itself.

However, we must recognize, as with most cultures, that Egypt was not immune to foreign influence. In fact, most successful civilization must borrow from other cultures some technological advances, even if they produce a few themselves. Thus, it is clear that the Predynastic culture of Egypt was receptive to ideas from neighboring lands.

Foreign architectural and artistic motif, and perhaps even the idea of writing, were adopted by the Egyptians at the dawn of history. However, like the chariots of the New Kingdom which were themselves adapted from foreign sources, but modified to be lighter in order to better handle the Egyptian terrain and the Egyptians battle tactics, all such borrowings from even the earliest times were quickly fitted into an Egyptian context.

Hence, there is certainly no evidence whatsoever for an invasion of dynastic conquerors, though in ancient times as even today, Egypt was a cultural melting pot, where Africa, Asia and the Mediterranean met. The civilization that emerged in the Nile Valley simply absorbed influences from all of these areas.

Others argue thse early Egyptians and accomplishments were Asiatic in descent.

However “melting pot” gains more validity when you consider that the oldest mummy, taken from that period before the reigns of the Kings of Egypt was fair haired, and fair skinned. Archaeologists believe he was an aborigine of Egypt, not of inferior race, and was one conquered by Asiatic invasion. It was their mingling that many believe formed the ancestors of the Eqyptian civiliation later.

There’s no consensus or absolutes amonst archaelogists on the culture. Yes, the Kemetians were black. But to suggest they were the only, let alone the superior, of all races that contributed to Egyptian civilizations is seriously amiss… and borderline on absurd. Carruthers might as well be teaching kids the earth is really flat, and satellite photos are just a government conspiracy.

Carruthers’ insistence upon teaching African superiority in ancient Egypt ignores the presence and influence of other cultures, and worse yet – ignores the rewards and advancements possible when you have a “melting pot” of cultures. The “melting pot” of inventions and innovation is at the heart of the greatest achievements.

There is nothing wrong with learning and honoring historic customs and cultures, Joe. But this is not what the SSCAV was doing with the Carruthers curriculum.

Point is, Joe, like ancient Egypt, the US is a melting pot of Americans from a plethora of cultures and countries. It is our bonds, yet diversive visions and ambitions, that makes us strong. Combine that with capitalism and the free market, which rewards innovation and advancements, and you have what makes us unified… not separatist. (And I can see by your follow up post, we agree on that)

It is, however, absolutely anti-American to teach children at an impressionable age to hate, and to promote segregation, and racial superiority.. which is what they are doing with this curriculum. Especially since what he teaches as “superiority” of civilization, is not rooted in archaeological fact.

October 14th, 2008 at 1:54 pm
ICanCopyandPasteToo
 10Reply to this comment  

From Trinity Church May 1998

TUCC’s CREDIT UNION

MEMBERSHIP INFORMATION

+

Members of TUCC
+

Immediate families of TUCC member
+

TUCC Employees

Minimum of $100.00 to open account +

one-time joining fee of $2.00

Interest Rates

o

Secured Loans – 7.5% ($500 or more)
o

Unsecured Loans – 13% ($2,500 max.)
o

New Car Loans over 48 months – 7.5%
o

New Car Loan over 60 months – 8.0%

($20,000 maximum with 20% down payment)

o

Used Car Loan under 36 months – 9.5%

(no more than three years old)

Dividends declared quarterly

October 14th, 2008 at 11:16 pm
sandormatyo
 11Reply to this comment  

I don’t visit conservative blogs often. When I do, I am entertained and amused. Growing up in the Vietnam era, I learned that the worse handle you could hang on someone with whom you were in disagreement was “communist”. Now it’s “socialist” or someone who “hates America”.

George Wallace and Ross Barnett knew how to call a spade a spade. Today we hear that some people are from “exotic” places or they’re “not like us”. Euphemisms such as these are certainly the refuges of scoundrels.

Barack is not anti-American, but you all know that. Like high school debaters, you’re using fuzzy factoids to advance your arguments. Step back a bit and see how silly you sound to outsiders.

October 15th, 2008 at 4:45 pm
 12Reply to this comment  

“Fuzzy factoids”? The CAC documentation on the Obama/Ayers/Rolling educational experiment in Chicago schools for “social justice” are a “fuzzy factoid”?

Obama’s membership in the Democratic Socialist of America party subsidiary, the New Party, in Chicago (and their proud endorsement and celebration of their member winning the IL Senate seat) is a “fuzzy factoid”?

Obama’s educational policy, as on his website, for “social and economic justice”… a socialist party agenda… is a “fuzzy factoid”??

Obama and Ms. O’s speeches, peppered with Saul Alinsky quotes, are “fuzzy factoids”?

So you grew up in the Vietnam era, eh? Well so did I bubba… with a husband in the military. So let me guess… you were one of those on the streets with a “sign, sign, everywhere a sign”, right?

You shoulda cut back on the LSD, window pane and black beauties, man…. Facts and truths wouldn’t have to be so “fuzzy” for you.

October 15th, 2008 at 4:52 pm
 13Reply to this comment  

@sandormatyo:

I want to know what you think “soclialism” is????

I think it is someone that has listened to Black Liberation Theology, someone that wants to “Psread the Wealth” thru taxes, and takes money away from those that make money to give to those that do not for Social experiments.

If it quacks like a duck, sounds like a duck you can assume it is a duck.

October 15th, 2008 at 4:52 pm
sandormatyo
 14Reply to this comment  

MataHarley:

I appreciate that many people would become concerned about the concept of “social and economic justice”. Coming from a union family (more Hoffa than Alinsky), I saw early on the value of organizing. As a history major I read about the brutal treatment of labor by capital. Only with the strikes of the 30s led by organizers such as Mr. Alinsky was a middle class established in this country. Mr. Alinsky said many quotable things.

Obama, like many politicians, used what he could to get ahead. The New Party helped him along. They faded out and he worked his way up through the mainstream. Reverend Wright appealed to his flock to take charge of their lives and free themselves of social, political, economic and religious bondage. Obama listened and took the steps that would one day lead him to the verge of the White House.

Obama’s pretty mainstream now. His tax increase on the upper 5% is just. They can afford it.

I don’t know if he’ll be a successful president, but we must remove from power the oligarchs that control our lives, send our children off to die for no reason, and hoard the wealth for themselves.

Can you repond to this post without bitter, angry sarcasm?

October 15th, 2008 at 9:42 pm
 15Reply to this comment  

Oba@sandormatyo:

Obama is mainstream??? Huh That is ridiculous. If more people knew who he was, more people would run awayfrom him, but the MSM has done a good job of hiding who he is.

You do know that taxing businesses is a tax on everyone????? A majority of small businesses make over the $250,000 level in Obama’s tax code. And how can you give tax breaks to people that do not even pay taxes. About 40% of the population do not pay Federal Taxes, where does this 95% come from??????

And if Obama is mainstream, we are in deep trouble.

October 16th, 2008 at 6:17 am
RgularJoe
 16Reply to this comment  

My point to all of you whom reject Barack Obama, Afrocentrism, Black Liberation Theology as some type of radical, off-the-cuff, socialist, Anti-American rant are narrow minded and ignorant to the needs of people who do not look like you. My firm belief is that for any person to become a successful, well-adjusted, contributing member of the greater society they must have a strong sense of self. Black Liberation Theology, Afro-centrism is an attempt to build up the self-esteem of a minority class that for the most part are looking for a way to gain a firm grasp of who they are. To understand better who they are and where they come from. To know thyself. Black Liberation Theology teaches three things: 1. Love & respect God & your fellow man 2. That you can accomplish anything regardless of the obstacles placed in front of you 3. To be proud of your Black/African heritage. These are all very important in forming resolve in a person. In developing an upstanding, community minded, individual.

Afro-centrism does more of the same. It teaches people that your heritage is not just slavery. That your ancestors accomplished & contributed a great deal to this world.

What I think upsets people is that through this lense, white people are called out for their mistakes and weaknesses. And the fact that a people may not want want to adopt your culture completely is an afront to the American Exceptionalism that you all profess.

Please do not get me wrong, I am not trying to pit white against blacks, although there are several comments made over and over that are short sighted, but I understand. I understand having pride & prejudice. We are all prone to making mistakes. However, the question is how do we gain better understanding and appreciation for the differences & viewpoints we all have without degrading or demoralizing the other person.

The fact that Obama wishes to spread the wealth is not Socialistic, its human. To see another struggle and to reach back and lend a help is just the right thing to do. When you talk about giving more tax cuts to Corporations and the wealthiest 5% what you do is maintain the status quo. Corporations biggest expense side cost are Employees. Paying you too much drives down their profits. Their main job is to expand profits. His interests and your interests are at odds with each other. The real stimulus package is to put moe money into non-business owners, the vast majority of this country. The more money you put into the consumers hands the more they will spend, which will increase demand, then profits, and finally taxes. Its completely illogical to believe that by putting more into the hands of the few that it will somehow increase the coffers of the many. Its simple numbers. There will always be more shoppers than businesses…always. The numbers just won’t work.

The Republican intent is there, but the execution is terrible. Because just like George Bush and his Cowboy Capitalism, Free “deregulated” Market, you forget that people will naturally look out for themselves and their own first (As exhibited with AIG & Lehman Bros). Which means those at the top want to stay there and don’t want to share their shiny exclusive toys with the rest of us. meaning you lose again because his wants are at odds with yours.

In conclusion what all this means is that Barack is talking about is helping people get on their feet by installing a strong sense of self into people so that they will have enough pride in themselves not to accept handouts. To fight against the odds for their success and if they need a little a help then you give them some help, not a hand out, some help. He also understands that there needs to be rules so Corporations don’t get too big for their pants and drag us down again. That is not a socialist, that is a person who is FOR the mainstream.

October 16th, 2008 at 7:23 am
 17Reply to this comment  

Black Liberation Theology is not radical???? What the hell are you talking about. Do you even know what it is. It is for the destruction of the Uniteds States way of life. Not radical.

You can find out who you are without trying to destroy the economic sustem in the United States.

If it walks like a duck, talks like a duck, it is a duck. Same as a Socialist

October 16th, 2008 at 7:50 am
Uddercha0s
 18Reply to this comment  

Don’t take anything I have to say on Black Liberation Theology. There are plenty of videos here:
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=james+cone&search_type=&aq=f

James Cone in his own words explains it in the first video or from his book:

“Whether the American system is beyond redemption we will have to wait and see. But we can be certain that black patience has run out, and unless white America responds positively to the theory and activity of Black Power, then a bloody, protracted civil war is inevitable.” [Black Theology and Black Power, Page 143]

October 16th, 2008 at 8:09 am
RgularJoe
 19Reply to this comment  

@stix1972:

The question is do you know what it is. Black Liberation Theology has been preached in one form or another since the first Africans were brought to the shores of America and taught Christian values. It does not destroy anyone or anything. It builds…again you just don’t like that it is contrary to what you see as a perfect system. The system is not perfect and as long as you continue to hide from that fact you will not be open to progress.

Like I said yesterday, just because people yell out for change or improvement does not always bring the total destruction of a society or way of life. America has been founded and improved through this fundamental understanding of change & growth through struggle. If it worked for George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Malcolm X, & Martin Luther it can work for Jeremiah Wright, Barack Obama, & myself. Remember when Dr. King was fighting for equality he wasn’t as revered as he is now. In fact people routinely sought to snuff out his life until they finally succeded.

The hardest thing a person will ever have to do is face down their own demons

October 16th, 2008 at 8:18 am
 20Reply to this comment  

You really hav no clue what you are talking about do you???? Libertation Theology came out of South America in th 60’s and then came to America, and then Cone made Black Liberation Theology out of it. It is a Marxist Front dressed up asa religion.

It has nothing to do with African Culture.

MLK was not preaching anytyhing like what Rev Wright, Phleger, Obama and the rest of thie ilk are preaching. He wanted everyone to be equal. No wonder he was a Republican

October 16th, 2008 at 8:21 am
RgularJoe
 21Reply to this comment  

@Uddercha0s:

And what was the Revolutionary War. What was that…it was people fighting to be recognized as fully human and free. Don’t preach to me about revolution when everything we have today is founded on revolution. Get your heads out of the clouds. I swear this is why most Black people continue to believe that this a racist society because you all refuse to recognize the LEGITIMACY and another way of doing, speaking, or seeing things. You are not the only way!

October 16th, 2008 at 8:26 am
Uddercha0s
 22Reply to this comment  

Iran-Contra. Sandinistas. Marxism.
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,141037,00.html

Originally minted in Latin America in the 1960s, liberation theology is a controversial current of religious thought that has, in less than two decades, gained widespread currency. To many, it is the duty of Christians to support the rights of the poor and oppressed. But among its extreme proponents, liberation theology has been used as an apologia for revolutionary upheaval in the Third World that strives to link the imperatives of Christian charity with the dictates of Marxist class struggle.

October 16th, 2008 at 8:28 am
Uddercha0s
 23Reply to this comment  

@RgularJoe: So then you will refrain from calling me a racist if I were to tell you that I am a member of the Ku Klux Klan? After all, they are “Bringing a message of hope and deliverance to white christian America”. Are you going to “recognize the LEGITIMACY and another way of doing, speaking, or seeing things.”?
(This is an example, I am no,t nor ever have been, a member of the KKK)

Cone’s words were Civil War, not Revolution.

October 16th, 2008 at 8:34 am
RgularJoe
 24Reply to this comment  

@stix1972:

MLK was talking about spreading the weath at the end of his life. He was talking about the classism that persists in America.

And for your information Nat Turner was a FORM of Black Liberation Theology. Harriet Tubman, Sojourner Truth was a form of Black Liberation Theology. They talked about God delivering them to freedom. The churches that were being bombed in the South for teaching children to read was Black Liberation Theology. Don’t tell me about my culture. The Church has always been a haven and conduit for change & progress. And when it is confronted with resistance it becomes revolution.

Dr King sought equality in a time when equality was restricted to a certain skin pigmentation. He sought to Liberate Black folk from oppressive rules that under cut their God given freedoms. BLACK LIBERATION THEOLOGY! Don’t get caught up in the hype, this is older than you, McCain, & Obama. This has been a movement that most of you only heard of because of Youtube.

I know what I am talking about & I know the results of it. I have benefited from it. I have grown and seen its positives in my very own life. So call it what you will, but I will always defend the spiritual, emotional, mental, and physical freedoms that my wife, my child, my family deserves. Any person that wishes to subvert that will be dealt with. It can happen through diplomacy or with blood, but too many people died to let us move backwards due to the ignorance of a few.

And the funny thing is that America preaches it with its Bush Doctrine, but it can’t stand to have anyone from its lower ranks demand that America repents and pay retribution for her crimes.

October 16th, 2008 at 8:43 am
 25Reply to this comment  

Yes we fought for Freedom, not Marxism which is tyrrany. We fought 2 wars in Europe against Marxism. Or has everyone forgotten that.

We fought against the British to get the government out of our lives, which I am sure the Founding Fathers are rolling in their graves at what our country has become.

October 16th, 2008 at 8:44 am
RgularJoe
 26Reply to this comment  

@Uddercha0s:

Dude you can do whatever the hell you want to do as long as you don’t encroach on me and my family. We all have different views, but when you work to prevent mine from being recognized, we have a problem.

There are stupid people everywhere…I don’t have to agree with them or like them. But they should be respected.

October 16th, 2008 at 8:48 am
RgularJoe
 27Reply to this comment  

@stix1972:

I agree…but its not freedom of speech that causes them concern. Freedom of speech gave my Greatgrandparents freedom. Without that then I would stil have an iron collar around my neck right now.

You have no idea what it is like. Last week I went to the courthouse to register my business with Prince William County in Virginia. A formerly confederate state where there are signs comemmorating historic battles of the Civil War everywhere. A constant reminder of my history in this country. I thought about the fact that years ago my family wasn’t even allowed to look white people in the eye. At that moment i wanted to tear up but then I had to remember that I am not in that situation today and it is because of Black Liberatin Theology, Freedom of Speech, Freedom from Religious Persecution I can own my own business and walk where the hell I please.

So how you can say that it is radical or anti-American I will never understand.

October 16th, 2008 at 8:57 am
Uddercha0s
 28Reply to this comment  

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

James H. Cone Black Power and Black Theology

Not radical? Not un-American? This is why you can own you own business and walk freely? This is Jerimiah Wright’s mentor.

**EDIT Joe, Unfortunately race is involved in this discussion and I hate that it is. It is not race that I am arguing about, it is the philosophy that is being preached. I could care less what the race of the next POTUS is. My concern is that they represent ALL people of the US of A. Obama has had way too many Marxists and Socialists surrounding him his entire life.

October 16th, 2008 at 9:10 am
voter
 29Reply to this comment  

@RgularJoe: You are so right, my family is VERY diverse and I want my children to know and embrace their culture (all of it the hungarian and black, and the hispanic). People are always scared of something they don’t understand. If more people took the initiative to learn about all walks of life, then we wouldn’t have the racist problem, we have today. All I can do is pray we KEEP moving forward.

October 16th, 2008 at 9:24 am
 30Reply to this comment  

@voter: Let’s see. I am Polish, German, Lithiuanian, Norwegian, Jamaican, Mongolian, Scotch, English and a little of everything else. I am the Melting Pot, what America used to be. I know of my family’s culture and history, but I am an American first. All the hyphanation-America is ruining this country. We have no one culture anymore, we are a big group of Political Idendities to be used by both parties.

We are totally screwed and will be Socialist like Eurabia in 20 years, if not sooner.

October 16th, 2008 at 9:34 am
Uddercha0s
 31Reply to this comment  

@voter: Are you going to teach your children to embrace the Hungarian culture that oppressed (Magyarization) the Slovak people?

http://www.slovakia.org/history-magyarization.htm

October 16th, 2008 at 9:40 am
voter
 32Reply to this comment  

@stix1972: First of all I was not saying that any one of my children were all I said they are diverse. One is black and two are hispanic, and all mixed with hungarian, I bring that to the table. I just said I want them to embrace all thier cultures. I teach them to love and embrace each others as well as the nieghbors, I encourage them to get to know about thier friends as well. My childern will grow up to accept any and everyone, because they will have the knowledge. I’m sorry that you don’t have any connection to any of your cultures. But in your statement you are the melting pot, so whats wrong with the melting pot taking pride in their culture, (ALL OF THE CULTURE) I’m not trying to argue, I was simply telling Rgular Joe, that I agree with him. And I am glad he said what he said. It needed to be said.

October 16th, 2008 at 9:45 am
voter
 33Reply to this comment  

The first sentence didn’t make any sense sorry my 2 year old was demanding my attention as I wrote it.

I was not saying that my children are all hungarian, black, and hispanic. They are a mix between them. I want them to respect all of thier siblings culture as well as thiers.

October 16th, 2008 at 9:49 am
RgularJoe
 34Reply to this comment  

@Uddercha0s:

I understand that race is not your issue…but what you don’t understand is that Obama is a Black man, a man that like myself and others with our history is still struggling to grasp an identity. To create a space in a world that doesn’t understand you.

In searching for yourself you may encounter fringe perspectives. But what always has allowed America to grow through struggle without imploding is that there is a bond of humanity between us all, especially Black & White. A force that centers us and refocuses us on what truth is… That we are all interdependent…and that we are only as strong as our weakest link. Thats why its important to have the social programs that Help people. Thats why its important to teach kids about their history so that they can stand strong and resolute in who they are. Not blow with the changing wind.

Obama is important to American history because he is truly of the lower class that has risen to the heights of success. His story is important for my nephew, my daughter…his vision is important in re-energizing The People into an active and politically aware group that will hold those at the very top accountable for their actions.

From my perspective and my personal history, I don’t see marxism…I see the American Dream being realized for the American People. For people who for a long time have felt left out of the political arena.

Note: Throughout history you will always find revolutionary views at the bottom rung of society. its because those are the people looking for power in a society that has stripped them of the basic need to self actualize. To feel like they control their future and are not held victim to the whims of people who only come to their community during an election year. (I always hated when that happened…Show up when your job is not at risk.)

October 16th, 2008 at 9:50 am
 35Reply to this comment  

Why is Obama so inmportant??? He did not come from poverty,he came from a middle class family.
Obama is not special in any way other than being half black. That is not a reason to vote for someone.

What about Judge Thomas that truly came from poverty and worked his way up. Or Condeleza Rice that had share cropper grandparents. Or Lt Gov Steele. Or are they UNcle Toms, because they do not believe that African Americans need to have special privaleges and get a better chance because of thier skin to get a job, or to get into a college? the worse thing to be right now is a white male in his 30, just like me. I have gotten screwed many times beause I am not black or female. I got passed over because of quotas.

America is still the best place to live, but I fear we are going to fall to the left and become Eurabia and loose our place as “The Land of the Free”, due to Political Correctness and social experiments that have been proven to be failures.

October 16th, 2008 at 10:38 am
 36Reply to this comment  

Sandormatyo… first let me get this out of the way. You asked me to “respond without bitter angry sarcasm”. I most certainly can and do that. However I generally work on a cause/effect with some posters. And in this case, you entered the FA community with the following statement:

Barack is not anti-American, but you all know that. Like high school debaters, you’re using fuzzy factoids to advance your arguments. Step back a bit and see how silly you sound to outsiders.

You have not read many of the articles we authors have posted here. Those include quite thorough coverage of Steve Diamond’s exposure of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, and the agenda of William Ayers, Ken Rolling and Obama in that school experiment. They also include much of Obama’s unadmitted past with the New Party, his methods of politics rooted in the Chicago political machine, as well as his sundry policies founded on the redistribution of wealth.

Instead, you came here, read one post and comments, and accused the forum of using fuzzy factoids to advance arguments… like high school debates. Thus my response to you reflected the attitude you bore on your entry.

With your second comment/response, you demonstrate more respect for the level of discussion. And to that, I can most certainly maintain and equal sense of decorum.

And as a response, there appears to be little common ground for you and I. You are willing to give Obama’s past and current socialist alliances a pass as a politician who “used what he could to get ahead.” That’s odd, as he presents himself as a different kind of politician – above all that. You are quite comfortable to ignore this obvious disconnect between his words and his actions.

You say ” Mr. Alinsky said many quotable things.” Your own statement…

Growing up in the Vietnam era, I learned that the worse handle you could hang on someone with whom you were in disagreement was “communist”. Now it’s “socialist” or someone who “hates America”.

… is eerily similar to Alinsky’s owns words in part of his 1972 Playboy interview:

In those days everybody who challenged the establishment was branded a Communist, and the radical movement began to disintegrate under the pressure.

Perhaps you are intimately familiar with Alinsky’s writing, and agree. Or not. But I agree… there are many nefarious characters that have quotable quotes… including Nikita Khrushchev

America will fall without a shot being fired. It will fall from within.

I suggest we are dangerously close to that prescient statement already.

Obama, today, uses Alinsky’s quotes, passed off as utopian ideals, to gain support for his policies. They form the very foundation of his view towards government’s role in the citizen’s life. This does not suggest that Obama’s socialism philosophy “faded out” along with the New Party.

Like Khrushchev’s statement, I interpret Obama’s use of these quotes as a warning shot over the bow. And combined with the other “fuzzy factoids” I mentioned above, it solidifies a proven pattern in Obama’s political philosophy.

The Alinsky quotes used extensively by Obama and his wife in their respective campaign trail speeches were excerpts from Alinsky’s “Rules for Radicals”…. the handbook for mass organization to seize power… oddly enough by the government to act on behalf of “the people”.

As a history major, I should not have to point this out to you. The inherent problem is giving the government that much power… most especially thru seizing the earnings of it’s citizens… historically leads to an elite, corrupt hierarchy, and dirt poor citizenry. Instead of financial classes based on ambition and achievement of a wide variety (which we have today), we end up with only two classes under socialism/Marxism/Communism (the first two being the steps to the last).

In a socialist world, opportunity and rewards for achievement are dashed. The quotes are lofty words in ideology, yes. Unfortunately, you cannot mandate charity in man, and as long as humans walk the earth, the quintessential utopia is but a dream. History has proven any attempt to achieve such a utopia via government is a devasting failure for the common man.

Then you say:

Obama’s pretty mainstream now. His tax increase on the upper 5% is just. They can afford it.

I don’t know if he’ll be a successful president, but we must remove from power the oligarchs that control our lives, send our children off to die for no reason, and hoard the wealth for themselves.

How bizarre is that statement since you and Obama are advocating placing *more* power in the oligarchs that control our lives… and in fact expanding the areas of our lives that they will control.

As the Annenberg Challenge (i.e. his educational policies), his health, energy and tax policies show, Obama is far from mainstream on capitalism and the free market. The “social and economic justice” that is the foundation of his education policies is straight from the Rosa Luxemberg/William Ayers tact to indoctrinate future generations into socialism. Hardly mainstream capitalism… which is the heart of the American opportunities.

Like Obama, you have decided taxation of a segment of the population “is just” and “they can afford it” I’m not sure where you, or Obama, have decided you are the authority to decide how much citizens can earn, and how their earnings should be spent. That 5% may be enough to expand their business, and add more jobs. But that choice is now removed from their power by those such as you and Obama. For in your opinion, the government knows better how to spend the taxpayer’s earnings.

Hardly “mainstream” American attitude.

That you believe Obama’s soundbytes of his tax policy without further research is somewhat naive. Obama’s “tax cut” is actually a spending increase, according to the Tax Policy Center.

Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama’s plan to cut taxes on 95 percent of taxpayers would effectively increase government spending by an average of $64.8 billion a year and effectively raise income tax rates for many Americans, even on some earning $20-$50,000 per according to the non-partisan Tax Policy Center.

The heart of Obama’s tax cut proposal is in his use of refundable tax credits, which the Center describes as “credits available to eligible households even if they have no income tax liability” — in short, refunds available even to those who don’t pay taxes. These refunds are claimed on tax returns and are paid to all taxpayers who qualify for them, regardless of whether they owe taxes or not. These refunds have the ability of reducing a taxpayer’s liability below zero, meaning they can get a refund without actually paying taxes.

In real numbers, 60.7 million people who have no tax burden at all will receive refunds from Obama, while only 33.8 million people, who pay approximately 40 percent of income taxes, will get any kind of refund. Twenty percent of taxpayers, who pay 87.5 percent of total income taxes, will actually see after-tax income decline under Obama by nearly two percent, according to the Center.

By using these refunds, Obama is able to claim that he is giving a tax cut to 95 percent of households, although only 62 percent of households pay any income taxes at all. This means that Obama’s tax plan calls for giving money to some households that do not pay taxes, including a plan to make community college “essentially free” and pay 10 percent of the interest on all mortgages.

Devil in the details, sandormatyo. If there is one thing Obama is good at, it’s raising and spending vast amounts of other people’s money. And he is very careful to pick out only the perceived benefits – a half truth at best – to fool the faithful into a lulled sense of entitlement to government gifts.

The very principle of determining how much a citizen can be allowed to earn before mandating government charity is a dangerous one to implement in our government policies. And once we hit that slope, it’s all downhill from there. For our own good, and increased government control, it will only encompass more and more of the workers’ earnings… of all classes. Obama, Ayers and ilk, are determined to wage class warfare.

There is no such thing as just a little bit of socialism is good. It’s a stealth monster that, as we can see in our own country’s history, just grows into a huge ineffective, money hungry monster as time goes on.

Our increased steps into government welfare and power over the decades have set the stage today for US citizens not see socialism as the dangerous animal it is. By your entire post, I can only assume that you fall into that group of citizens blind to our move to socialism.

… or else this is what you desire.

October 16th, 2008 at 11:15 am
 37Reply to this comment  

Ooops.

Somebody spilled the bold.

October 16th, 2008 at 11:18 am
voter
 38Reply to this comment  

@Uddercha0s: Im going to teach them about all of it, including the bad, just like how the americans STOLE and KIDNAPPED africans, to be slaves. Then I’m going to teach them how wrong it is. If we don’t learn from our history we are doomed to repeat it.

October 16th, 2008 at 11:31 am
ChrisG
 39Reply to this comment  

Voter,

I assume you are going to forget to teach that it was Dutch slave traders buying slaves from Islamic Africans. Am I wrong? Will you also teach them about how America fought a war (the only country to do so) which ended slavery? Will you teach them who put blacks in the Supreme Court? Secretary of State? Chairman JCS? Will you teach them wha tthe leftists did to these people? Will you teach them that there are still countries who have legal slavery (and the US is not one of them)?

Will you teach them that families like mine risked eerything and gave their lives bringing freed slaves through the Underground Rail Road?

Or is my assumption correct?

I see a lot of fake history here and fake Identification. Obama was never “lower class”, nor did his ancestors share the American Slave tradition. What Obama IS however is a died in the wool totalitarian socialist whose followers are fanatically loyal.

Even Howard Stern, in a rare case of saying something which makes sense, noticed this. His “man on the street” interviews switched Obama’s amd McCain’s positions (he said Obama stood for things attributed to McCain) and the responders where whole-heartedly for Obama, even saying that Palin would be a great VP.

Obama is packaged and his followers blind. Obama’s associations make up who he is. His “present” votes in congress will not work if he becomes President. There are no teleprompters when reality smakes us in the face and ground commanders need guidance now.

Many things scare me about Obama. His race is not one of them, yet that is all I hear about from his attack adds… Ok that and lying about McCain’s health plan.

I hear rampant class warfare, taxing and punishing achievement. I hear a terrifying speach about a “Civilian National Security Force”. I hear Obama honestly surprised that Soldiers like me who are deployed in warzones get to choose what they want to watch on TV. I hear the associations and sometimes a half-hearted denouncement only AFTER the associations are brought to life. I hear the threatening of TV and radio stations if they allow adds critical of Obama. I hear that any criticism of Obama is “racist” yet it is just fine for the left to call anyone else any horrible thing. I see “anarchists” attacking RNC delegates at their convention but calling conservatives “hateful” because some reporter makes up “kill him” stories (denied by both the Secret Service and police). I hear Obama and his supporters saying “just you wait” on his own website/blog. And I see black conservatives who are freed of the leftist plantation brutally attacked for not toeing the race line and voting Obama. Yet somehow the left does not consider that racist.

October 16th, 2008 at 11:37 am
Uddercha0s
 40Reply to this comment  

just like how the americans STOLE and KIDNAPPED africans

Hmmm.. some revisionist history?

@RgularJoe: I’m working on a response to our convo.

October 16th, 2008 at 11:40 am
 41Reply to this comment  

Im going to teach them about all of it, including the bad, just like how the americans STOLE and KIDNAPPED africans, to be slaves.

God help your kids if you are home schooling, Erika/voter. For your knowledge of history is deplorable.

Slave trade for Africans and English women (yes… white English women were also sold…) was started by the Dutch traders.

Or perhaps you thought those colonialists were busy sailing all over the seas looking for slaves?

Duh…

October 16th, 2008 at 11:40 am
Wordsmith
 42Reply to this comment  

Im going to teach them about all of it, including the bad, just like how the americans STOLE and KIDNAPPED africans, to be slaves.

Will this include teaching them how the slave trade wasn’t exclusive to just America? That Arabs and Africans had a heavy-hand in it, and that the first anti-slavery movement began in the West?

The moral question of slavery only came up amongst western powers; not in Asia, not in Arabia, not in Africa; but in the West… namely, among the British and American colonialists.

October 16th, 2008 at 11:44 am
 43Reply to this comment  

LOL! I see four of us, johnny on the spot with history lessons…. ChrisG, you get the prize, beating two of us by 3 minutes. Honorable mention for Word, bringing in the morality issue.

So does this mean voter/Erika was a grad of an Obama/Ayers school of philosopy??

October 16th, 2008 at 11:48 am
 44Reply to this comment  

@voter:

just like how the americans STOLE and KIDNAPPED africans

Are you going to teach them how Obama’s ancestors engaged in the slave trade?

October 16th, 2008 at 11:50 am
 45Reply to this comment  

@voter: Are you going to teach them about the slave trade that is stilgoingon in Africa, Middle East and Asia????? Mainly young women that are forced into protistution.

Where did you learn your history of the Slave Trade???? Whoever taught you about it did a piss poor job of it.

The African on the coast of Africa (mainly Muslim), went on raiding parties to the interior of Africa, then sold them to the Dutch. Then they would eventually sail them to the Americas.

And guess what it is still happening in Africa and the Middle East and Asia. You do not see it in Western Society

October 16th, 2008 at 11:54 am
Dave Noble
 46Reply to this comment  

What breathtaking moral reasoning — The Dutch and the Africans made us do it. The entire economy of the American South was based on owning human beings as property, and the best you can do is point your finger at the Dutch and Africans?

Here, try this analogy on for size — the police catch a child molester who has been keeping a child as his property and using the child for sexual gratification. When the cops arrest him he says, “Why are you guys harassing me. That guy down the street sold the kid to me. It was a bargain. What do you expect me to do, pass it up?”

Stix,

Before you accuse people of being piss poor historians, you need to check your own facts. Sexual slavery and human trafficking are far from exclusively non-Western activities. They are going on here in the United States and in Europe. And don’t try to tell me it’s being carried on only by non-Caucasians.

October 16th, 2008 at 12:33 pm
ChrisG
 47Reply to this comment  

Dave,

Congrats on, yet again, being dead wrong in your moronic attacks. Slavery, in any form, IS and always will be wrong. You again trot out your ignorance and partisan attacks for all to see.

No one SAID it was confined to one group. However, ANTI-slave and ANTI-human trafficing groups have come mainly from the “Evil” West. Yes, we have evil people in Europe and the US who steal kids and even try to buy them. Punishment is severe, though some say not severe enough. You analogy is idiotic at best and insultingly pathetic as it is.

Large scale human trafficing is MAINLY in Islamic African countries (like Sudan), but is also in SE Asian nations (Indonesia, Thailand and others). We have issues in Mexico where illegals get kidnapped and others in the US where criminals steal babies to sell or other nefarious actions. MAINLY does not mean “100%” (you must be using Obama’s comercial counting method).

And yes, where there is slavery, it must be destroyed. Just as piracy must still be fought. Being free is difficult and the costs are high. So guess what, if, for some odd reason, slavery still existed today in the US, people like me would, as they were in the 1800s, be running underground railroads and getting slaves to where they could be free. We would sacrifice and we would die.

As the US doe not have this issues, people like me volunteer as Soldiers to free others who are held slaves (that whole “injustice anywhere is injustice everywhere” thing). And all we and our CiC get in return from people like you is lie after spoon fed partisan lie about our motives, education levels, actions, and intentions. All the while our enemies, who ARE the ones who wish to enslave the world (and if you look at a the human traficing show up as perpetrators in many-but not all-areas) are put on a damn pedistal and called “minutemen” and other utter BS.

October 16th, 2008 at 12:52 pm
Dave Noble
 48Reply to this comment  

Chris,

Like far too many on this blog, you respond with empty knee-jerk insults to legitimate comments. Too bad John McCain couldn’t get away with that last night. On this blog it makes you look like a tough guy defending the FA sanctum from the liberal hoards. In the court of public opinion your kind of response is seen for what it is – fulmination instead of facts, sputum in place of specifics, and angst rather than argument.

Further, why do my comments have anthing to do with who I intend to vote for?

And please, what the hell is this about:

“As the US doe not have this issues, people like me volunteer as Soldiers to free others who are held slaves (that whole “injustice anywhere is injustice everywhere” thing). And all we and our CiC get in return from people like you is lie after spoon fed partisan lie about our motives, education levels, actions, and intentions. All the while our enemies, who ARE the ones who wish to enslave the world (and if you look at a the human traficing show up as perpetrators in many-but not all-areas) are put on a damn pedistal and called “minutemen” and other utter BS.”

You can stop shoving your service in my face. I said absolutely nothing about soldiers like you, or your education levels, actions, and intentions. Whenever someone starts a sentence with “people like you,” you can be sure nothing smart will follow. I am a twenty-year veteran of the Air Force. Unless you working on 30 plus, I suspect I was defending my country while you’re were still playing snap the towel in the high school locker room. I never, here or anywhere else put our enemies on a pedestal or called them “minutemen” (whatever that means).

Stop and think next time before you rant, Chris.

October 16th, 2008 at 1:35 pm
ChrisG
 49Reply to this comment  

Follow the last line of your own advice Dave and read. We were correcting the blantent innacuracies another poster made. There was no moral equivalence, just correction. I thought I made that clear, though I guess not.

I said “people like you” as I only know you from your posts and the other leftists on the site (and the left’s statements and actions in general). Do you fit the Micheal Moore bill? And no, I am not “shoving” my 16 years in your face. I AM however stating that IF the world was still in the dark ages, that I would be doing what my ancestors did but since it is not, I am doing what I can now. I also stated that the left would probably stab me in the back as they are now. You tend to side with them so, thus the “people like you”. Again, I though I made that clear.

Your statement above to another poster and myself is EXACTLY what you accuse me of being. You must excuse my “angst” at the left as I am damn sick and tired of their lies and associations.

However, you need to think about your own statements and realize I think you are projecting.

Stop and think next time before you rant, Dave.

October 16th, 2008 at 1:41 pm
Dave Noble
 50Reply to this comment  

Chris,

I read Voter’s post. There were no blatant inaccuracies. I return to my child molester analogy. Because someone else sold him the child, is it a blatant inaccuracy to say he “kidnapped” the child? I suggest to you he would be criminally charged with just that. But regardless of what Voter said, it’s shoddy morality to try to deflect attention from your crime by saying you had an accomplice.

There is all the difference in the world between responding specifically to what someone has said, even though in the process you may be hitting them hard, and doing what you did –Starting your post off with reflexive references to someone’s moronic ignorance, just because you disagree with their politics. Your post had nothing to do with what I said and everything to do with how you feel about “people like me.”

I’m sorry about your “angst.” Deal with it. Do you think outrage is the exclusive province of conservatives. Ever been to a liberal blog? If not, I suggest you try jousting with someone who doesn’t agree with you. There’s nothing like a good verbal duel to release your tensions.

October 16th, 2008 at 2:24 pm
sandormatyo
 51Reply to this comment  

MataHarley:

Sorry that I set you off with fuzzy factoids. I’ll try to me a more polite guest in your little corner of the world.

I don’t have the time to discuss all of the issues you brought up. Let me discuss socialism very briefly.

As you know, during the Vietnam War era, many opponents of the war were called communist. Now, many opponents of the ruling Republicans are called socialists, especially if they suggest raising taxes or regulating private industry.

Here are some definitions of socialism:

A theory of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole.
(Random House Unabridged Dictionary, 2006)

Any of various theories or systems of social organization in which the means of producing and distributing goods is owned collectively or by a centralized government that often plans and controls the economy.
(American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, 2006)

A political theory advocating state ownership of industry.
(WordNet, Princeton, 2006)

A theory or system of social reform which contemplates a complete reconstruction of society, with a more just and equitable distribution of property and labor. In popular usage, the term is often employed to indicate any lawless, revolutionary social scheme.
(Webster’s Revised Unabridged Dictionary, 1998)

Increasing the income tax rate on those earning >$250K by 3% is not socialism. It’s a tax increase.

Obama is not a socialist by any of these definitions and neither is Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont, who is the only member of the Senate who describes himself as a “democratic socialist”.

Obama votes for and advocates for a more mainstream liberal Democratic agenda than he had in his earlier years of public life. Many liberals have not forgiven him for his FISA vote, for his approval of the Iraq occupation budget or for his recent suggestion that he may support off-shore drilling if it’s packaged properly.

Remember, Eisenhower was in power for eight years when the top individual tax rate was 91%. Except for a few John Birchers, no one referred to him as a “socialist”.

If you wish to belittle or demean Obama, why not come up with a more truthful and accurate word to describe him. “Liberal” would be the most accurate, but conservatives may not find that provocative enough.

My fear is that he won’t be around for long. Some vicious gun owner, seething with rage, will soon have Obama in his crosshairs. I’ve seen the hate in the faces and in the eyes of those who think he’s a Muslim and a terrorist. I’ve heard the anger in the voices. I’ve read the vitriol.

This man’s life is in danger. Please don’t spread the hate.

October 16th, 2008 at 2:33 pm
ChrisG
 52Reply to this comment  

No, I do not go to leftist blogs. Rampant national socialists bore me with thier stupidity and spoon-fed marching orders. I am upset that when deployed I have to start too many calls with “I know CNN said this, but our base was not bombed and we did not rape and pillage anything, nor will we”. But enough of that.

As for the analogy, no, I dissagree in one important sense. The person who bought the child IS a criminal, but if the spouse (or another child) freed the enslaved child, THAT person is not a criminal. Yet this is not the case when referring to the USA and a stain which happened 150 years ago. That point is what I was getting at. The USA is painted as “evil” for slavey. No consideration is given for the fact we killed vast numbers of our own after the issue (wed sadly to “states rights”) led to the disintegration of the Federal Union, followed by massive destruction and even more loss of life. No other nation has expended so much and conducted a very unpopular intercine war to accomplish this. Yet the whole nation is still held “guilty” for something every culture has done. No other culture is held to this standard and nor is the fact much of the nation fought against slavery in one fashion or another. Nor are those of us whose ancestors not only never held slaves but worked to free them given credit. No, we get thrown in with the few who held slaves.

In your analogy, that would mean the whole family, even the ones who called the police, aided in the investigation, and helped the child escape are thrown in prison for life.

October 16th, 2008 at 2:35 pm
ChrisG
 53Reply to this comment  

“My fear is that he won’t be around for long. Some vicious gun owner, seething with rage, will soon have Obama in his crosshairs. I’ve seen the hate in the faces and in the eyes of those who think he’s a Muslim and a terrorist. I’ve heard the anger in the voices. I’ve read the vitriol.

This man’s life is in danger. Please don’t spread the hate.”

Nice propaghanda. Not true, but nice regurgitation of talking points. If anyone did try to assassinate Obama, conservatives would also call for the shooter’s head.

But then I have to ask if it is ok that the left really IS acting out the threats you seem to have heard, but against conservatives? Is it ok that cinder blocks were thrown on busses at the RNC convention? That deligates were attacked? Is it ok to make movies depicting the assasination of President Bush? Or does “spreading hate” not apply to the left (as many standards seem to not apply to the left’s conduct)?

“Liberal” is not how I would describe Obmama. “Leftist” is better as “Liberal” has to be further defined as “classical” or the modern leftist.

October 16th, 2008 at 2:49 pm
Dave Noble
 54Reply to this comment  

Again, with the automatic, all-encompassing “stupidity” charge. Come on, Chris, I know you’re better than that.

How about if the molester let the child go, that is, freed the child, would he cease to be a criminal? Americans kept slaves, Americans freed slaves. Do you see anyone who is not an American in that equation? And no, that doesn’t mean I hate my country, it just means I’m honest about it’s sins. You can’t move forward until you know where you are and where you’ve been.

BTW, stay safe the next time you’re deployed.

October 16th, 2008 at 2:54 pm
ChrisG
 55Reply to this comment  

Dave,

You seemed to miss-understand… again…. And yes, I consider those on the left who follow Obama without question stupid or at least easily mis-lead. The PUMAs would agree on this point, but they are being silenced. I do not consider those who follow socialism and class warfare intelligent. Even a fool like Howard Stern showed that on his show by swtching McCain and Obama positions and people still showed support for Obama… and wanted Pailin as VP. I have to wonder what they base their reasons on.

As for the molester, no, he still goes to jail, but the fact others in the house helped free the child and then went on for painful decades including and integrating that child in thier family until that child reached the point where they were equal (given say in the family, power to make decisions, etc) is ignored.

Other cultures, however, are totally absolved of any wrongs they did and that too is ignored and wrong. Why are African nations not held to standards the US is? Why are Islamic nations not held to standards the world imposes on the US? Why are European nations (with the exception of Germany’s NAZI period) not held to US standards. Why is Russia not held, nor Japan, nor China held accountable? All held slaves (and some still do), yet it is always the USA who gets its nose rubbed in it. The world seems to have forgot its darker history (and present)

Yes, our history is not perfect and we must never forget it, however, we MUST understand that not everyone was involved with this blight and these people, who often gave their lives to stop slavery are unfairly and dishonestly lumped in with the slave owners. For historical accuracy, these people must be acknowledged and absolved of guilt. So in a sense, we HAVE forgotten our history and hatred against people who have never done anything wrong is being sewn by the Wrights and Farakans of the world.

October 16th, 2008 at 3:00 pm
MataHarley
 56Reply to this comment  

A theory or system of social reform which contemplates a complete reconstruction of society, with a more just and equitable distribution of property and labor.

My but don’t that shoe fit, sandormatyo. This is easily accomplished under your innocent “tax increase”, “windfall taxes” and, of course (had you read the Tax Policy Center analysis I linked to above) Obama’s proposal to give tax credit revenues to those who do not pay taxes. Interesting form of welfare there. You also miss the point these refundable tax refunds are increased government spending…. all on the taxpayers’ dime.

Then of course, there is “universal healthcare”, aka “socialized healthcare”, which of course you must not consider socialism either. Somehow I wonder if the government will end up as owner of the energy that Obama wants to fund with taxpayer cash to the tune of $150 bil.

If a government seeks, say by windfall or any other kind of taxes, to limit the profit structure of any private enterprise before seizing what they deem is “too much”, that differs little from a government vesting in “control” of that company. It’s ability to expand operations has now been limited by government. Therefore it means little that a government must take over (ala Chavez/oil industries, farms, etal in Venezuela) actual titled ownership since the outcome is little different.

Obama’s quest for a more socialized America… evidently so cleverly disguised that you find ample ways to slide over calling a spade a spade … is something this nation cannot afford financially.

BTW, your over dramatization of Obama’s physical danger, and somehow linking “spreading the hate” to me personally, is so damned offensive, I hardly know where to begin. I am an avowed capitalist, and see more about his policies than either you care to see, or are able to see. There is nothing in my authored posts or thread comments about “hate” of Obama. Distrust, and complete opposition to his visions for America, yes. I will never vote, nor support anyone voting for, an overt socialist to be my command in chief.

That you translate my intense opposition to Obama’s socialist plans as “spreading the hate” is nothing more than some guilt trip you and the Obama faithul are trying to lay on those that don’t blindly follow your chosen leader. Already the cries begin, pre election, that if Obama loses, it somehow has to be about race, and not policies. You lay a very dangerous groundwork here, trying to clamp down on free speech and opinions by such Salem witch hunt accusations. So just who is actually “spreading hate”?

It’s interesting you assume the violence and destruction comes only from right wing fringe… which, yes, exists. Yet you ignore that the most violent protests and destruction comes from your own left wing fringe – from those with hate and vitriol in their eyes claiming they want peace. You can count Obama’s bud, William Ayers, amongst those.

Any POTUS life is in danger. Not the least of which included the President so many love to hate, George W. Bush. Why do I doubt you ever spent a nanosecond of fret for his safety? Considering you are of the opinion that he “sent our children off to die for no reason”, I have to wonder… just how large a part did you, personally, play in “spreading the hate” about him?

And BTW, the last I looked, our extraordinary men and women were young adults, volunteers in the service of this country. They were not drafted, nor forced. Our service branches do not enlist “children”.

October 16th, 2008 at 3:09 pm
sandormatyo
 57Reply to this comment  

MataHarley:

There’s just so much and I don’t have the time. Keep the peace.

October 16th, 2008 at 3:40 pm
 58Reply to this comment  

@sandormatyo:

This man’s life is in danger. Please don’t spread the hate.

You may be on to something there.

h/t – Ace The MSM Was Right: “Dangerous Incitment” Leads Man with AK-47 to Threaten Politician’s Life

A man in possession of a Republic of China passport and an AK-47 was arrested in a Fairfax hotel Sept. 30 for sending threatening messages to President George W. Bush and former Microsoft Chairman Bill Gates.

According to an Oct. 5 search warrant affidavit filed in Fairfax Circuit Court, the United States Secret Service contacted Fairfax police on Sept. 30 after tracking a man named Charn-Chen DAI to an Extended Stay America hotel on Lee Jackson Memorial Highway in Fairfax. Both agencies questioned DAI at that time.

Oh wait…

That was a threat on President Bush’s life.

Move along folks. Nothing to see here.

October 16th, 2008 at 4:58 pm
 59Reply to this comment  

@MataHarley:

Oops….

Somebody spilled the linkies.

October 16th, 2008 at 4:59 pm
Deb
 60Reply to this comment  

Wright’s discourse and others like it are indeed, radical. But they are not un-American even when they are anti-American.

Why? Because America is a precept — a body of beliefs, principles and practices that are so profound and powerful that ALL that is “evil” will fall in its wake, if we stand true to our creed and act out our faith in this country.

Does this statement resonate with anyone? “I disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”

How about this one? “Give me liberty, or give me death.”

This one? “O say does that Star Spangled Banner yet wave o’er the land of the free and the home of the brave”?

The history of the black man in this country has been the toughest and the truest testament to the power of our laws and Constitution and one of America’s greatest achievements that continues to unfold before our very eyes.

Working together, we have abolished slavery in this country, despite it being the most lucrative business proposition of the 18th and 19th centuries. Living up to our creed, has led this country to abolish Jim Crow in the 20th centruy. And today, in the 21st century, Barack Obama is running for president, and there are afrocentric educational centers that tell young black boys that they are worthy in the face of so much that tells them otherwise. They are free to openly question whether there is justice in a G-d who sees justice in white men oppressing black men then that is not our G-d.

If we the people can turn the tide of injustice of this magnitude … over time and on our own shores … there isn’t anything we cannot do so long as we uphold our Constitution.

October 16th, 2008 at 9:20 pm
Wordsmith
 61Reply to this comment  

How about if the molester let the child go, that is, freed the child, would he cease to be a criminal? Americans kept slaves, Americans freed slaves. Do you see anyone who is not an American in that equation? And no, that doesn’t mean I hate my country, it just means I’m honest about it’s sins. You can’t move forward until you know where you are and where you’ve been.

Dave,

I think your analogy is flawed in its premise; it misses the point of argument that we’re making, which isn’t that America is not without its sins, but that America is singled out and hammered again, and again, and again over it. It’s Howard Zinn’s lopsided handwringing angst on American history that I detest and reject. I heard him on the radio asked if the world would have been better off if America had never existed. He said yes. It is not a slander to call that belief “anti-American” AND unpatriotic. It is an appropriate description.

What breathtaking moral reasoning — The Dutch and the Africans made us do it.

What Voter seems to suggest- and we’re reading between the lines here- is that it is America who is solely to blame for the institution of slavery, and for the inhuman treatment and enslavement of blacks. That institution existed long before America became a country. And blacks have not been the unique victims of enslavement. And long before white Europeans participated in the African slave trade, Africans and Arabs enslaved Africans (and others). Even at the peak of the Atlantic slave trade, Africans possessed more slaves for themselves than they sent to western powers. Where is the outrage? Where are the calls for reparation?

Where is the balance? It is easy to judge the past through 20th and 21st century morality. But back then, enslavement had been around since the dawn of man, and the moral question didn’t exist for societies. Prior to the 18th century, people as a whole, didn’t think “outside the box” and begin questioning the enslavement of fellow human beings as a moral reprehensibility. It was only in the west- amongst evangelical Christians- that the world’s first anti-slavery movement was started. The emancipation of slaves in non-western countries wasn’t a moral issue, until western powers imposed the issue of morality upon them.

No other nation in the history of the planet ended slavery in the same way that the U.S. ended it, and in so short a span of time, as history is measured.

We’re not ignoring America’s sins. But this constant “America is racist”, “America has a history of slavery and oppression”, “America is an imperialist nation” as if America and America alone has sins of the past to answer for, is a historical distortion if it exempts all others of a longer history of slavery, imperialism, oppression, and atrocities that still take place in other parts of the world.

If not for western powers like Britain and the United States, where would the institution of slavery be today? When will self-loathing, self-hating, hand-wringing Howard Zinn liberals start acknowledging the things we can be proud of as a western nation?

October 16th, 2008 at 9:44 pm
voter
 62Reply to this comment  

@Wordsmith: We can look at most major civilizations from the beginnig of time, and find atrosities. I was responding to someones attack post, because I said I was going to teach my children about thier cultures. I don’t understand why it is so bad to have a sense of pride in where you come from, and pass that pride onto your children. My mother in-law was adopted by a hispanic woman, who couldn’t speak english. So her first language was spanish. She thought she was mexican untill she was 15. When she found out she was black, she had a MAJOR identitiy crisis. She lacked that sense of self pride. I would think you would understand this more than anyone Word, being Thai and being adopted by someone outside your culture, yourself.

This is the post I was responding to.
-
@voter: Are you going to teach your children to embrace the Hungarian culture that oppressed (Magyarization) the Slovak people?

Posts like that are just meant to attack.

I wouldn’t have even brought up America’s involvement with slavery. What’s happening, with me at least, I am not as extreme as I must seem to everyone, but I am forced to defend extreme points because of the attacks on the one word or sentences that people are choosing to respond to.

You know my husband has a great analogy. The whole melting pot doesn’t work for us. In a melting pot you lose all your texture and taste and mix with everyone else.
We are more like a salad. Each ingredient, makes the salad even better, you can taste all the different tastes, and textures, and the more you add the better it is. That’s what we see when we see the USA. I love our country, the good and the bad. We just need to remember our own past (good and bad) before we start judging others, and in the process of remembering, we need to take responsibility for our part, not point fingers to others. That’s how we will truly move forward.

October 17th, 2008 at 6:16 am
 63Reply to this comment  

We can look at most major civilizations from the beginnig of time, and find atrosities. I was responding to someones attack post, because I said I was going to teach my children about thier cultures.

I think the problem here, is stigmatizing you with preconceived notions, based upon your political affiliation, and the way you worded your comment #38. I can see that you said “teach them about all of it, including the bad”, but what sticks out is “the bad” since you went on to describe it. Did us right-wingers knee-jerk to it? Yes, we did.

I don’t understand why it is so bad to have a sense of pride in where you come from, and pass that pride onto your children.

There’s nothing wrong with it. But what troubles me is what Macsdragon3 said very well in another thread (comment #163): this idea of fixating one’s identity around being a hyphenated-American, rather than just being American.

People should take pride in their unique cultural heritage and ancestry; but multiculturalists take it to a point of narcissism. Not all cultures contributed equally to the history of this country. Because we don’t want to “offend” or have “hurt feelings”, we minimize historical traditions like Christmas trees in the public square and Christmas carols because these things might make some people feel “excluded”. The Christmas holiday is an American holiday. It should be recognized, embraced and respected as such. No one is asking you to worship Christ. But why is there this need to make people feel inclusion by changing traditions to read “winter holiday”, “holiday tree”, “winter carols”? I don’t demand during Cinco de Mayo that “my culture” be included and reflected in its celebration. If the entire nation doesn’t celebrate “Ramadan” and other religious holidays as equally as “Easter”, it’s because Islam and other religions are not equal, in terms of contributing to the shaping of America in the previous 200 years. Our country was founded upon Judeo-Christian values and beliefs. For a nation to survive, assimilation is critical. Bring your own unique culture to the shores, and add to what is already here; but don’t try to replace the established traditions and culture; don’t be a narcissist and feel hurt that your culture doesn’t get equal representation. During St. Patrick’s Day, we wear green and pinch those who don’t. It may be a superficial way to celebrate the day, but for us non-Irish folk, at least we are joining in the fun and not demanding other cultures impose themselves upon the same holiday.

My family is not Christian; yet my life would have been impoverished as a child had my parents not celebrated the “non-religious” and commercial aspects of Christmas. We had trees and exchanged cards. How sad is it, where one is prevented in some work places from giving someone a Christmas card? For fear of “offending”? This is as much an American tradition as it is Christian. It’s part of the glue that binds and gives us commonality.

For all the talks of tolerance and understanding of other cultures, there is a big intolerance from many on the left for expressions of cultural Christian heritage and traditions.

Immigrants used to come here and adopt and adapt (many still do); then the ACLU and multiculturalists reared their ugly little heads and have made them think freedom in America entitles you to come here and set up your own little “country within a country”. Assimilation is frowned down upon while diversity and multiculturalism is celebrated in all the wrong ways.

My mother in-law was adopted by a hispanic woman, who couldn’t speak english. So her first language was spanish. She thought she was mexican untill she was 15. When she found out she was black, she had a MAJOR identitiy crisis. She lacked that sense of self pride. I would think you would understand this more than anyone Word, being Thai and being adopted by someone outside your culture, yourself.

America IS my culture, Erika. That’s the thing. I don’t identify myself as Thai-American. I’m an American. To say “Thai-American” is as meaningful to me as saying I’m an “Arizonian-American” or “Pisces-American”.

I don’t need to root for a Thai or Asian American to be president of the U.S. I don’t need to feel like us Asians haven’t made it yet, because we haven’t had an Asia president of the U.S. yet; my children don’t need someone with Asiatic features to look up to; they can identify themselves with any hero and role-model they wish, of all ethnic stripes and color. Because I don’t define myself by skin color and ethnicity.

I know blacks have a rather unique place in our history. But I think the way to get beyond race is to “get over it” and quit seeing America in the 21st century as the same America of 150 or even 40 years ago. How do we get beyond race? Quit obsessing over it. Quit blaming me and my fellow Americans TODAY, for what happened 150 years ago to ancestors people didn’t even know. It’s the victim mentality that enslaves people today. Those looking for racism will be sure to find it- including in places where it doesn’t exist. Those walking around with a chip on their shoulder will surely be treated as if there’s something wrong with them. But no one is holding them down. They’re held down by the chains of their own victimology dogma.

This is the post I was responding to.
-
@voter: Are you going to teach your children to embrace the Hungarian culture that oppressed (Magyarization) the Slovak people?

Posts like that are just meant to attack.

Don’t let others push your buttons, Erika. You can always ignore.

I wouldn’t have even brought up America’s involvement with slavery. What’s happening, with me at least, I am not as extreme as I must seem to everyone, but I am forced to defend extreme points because of the attacks on the one word or sentences that people are choosing to respond to.

I agree. I certainly don’t see you as extreme, and I see you as someone with an open mind to listen and learn, and someone I can listen and learn from as well.

You know my husband has a great analogy. The whole melting pot doesn’t work for us. In a melting pot you lose all your texture and taste and mix with everyone else.
We are more like a salad. Each ingredient, makes the salad even better, you can taste all the different tastes, and textures, and the more you add the better it is. That’s what we see when we see the USA. I love our country, the good and the bad. We just need to remember our own past (good and bad) before we start judging others, and in the process of remembering, we need to take responsibility for our part, not point fingers to others. That’s how we will truly move forward.

Interesting take. I’ve always saw America as a melting pot, with multiculturalists wanting us to be a salad, where there is that wall of separation that exists- “country within a country”, where entire communities are almost kind of seceding from the rest of America, and no one wants to speak English. We’re the United States; not the United Nations of America.

My idea is adopt the established culture; then add what is specifically your own unique background to it. THAT is American. That is diversity. But don’t replace the established culture for your own. That is separatist and harmful to America.


October 17th, 2008 at 7:16 am
voter
 64Reply to this comment  

@wordsmith: I hear you and I can even relate to most of it, I agree with some of it. The problem is its an extreme. Yes I am an american as my children are, but america is made up of MANY cultures. If we just relate to and learn about AMERICA, and lose apart of ourselves, then we move backwards. We then move away from what america is all about. I do believe when somebody makes a choice to come to america, they have an obligation to learn our “culture”, and abide by our laws that we have. But they also have a responsibility to thier children to not forget and totally lose who they are. Otherwise all the wonderfull traditions and beliefs that are different from america will be lost and forgotten forever in our america. Should we expect to learn these things from text books? We need to embrace ALL cultures, and differences, without prejudice, in order to do so we need to educate our children, and they will do the same and so on. If we do not do this, racism will only get worse, because there will be the unknown, that we are scared of, and in turn will reject. We should not just become bland all mesh together and lose the individuallity. You can’t fully respect something untill you understand it. I like the salad analogy, because nothing loses its individual taste, and still becomes part of something bigger and better.

October 17th, 2008 at 8:07 am
 65Reply to this comment  

Posts like that are just meant to attack.

If you want to be taken seriously and have a two way conversation and an honest debate, which is what you claim to be interested in you need to seriously stop with the poor, pitiful me victimhood mentality.

You toss out your firebombs, not backed by any sort of anchor in reality and then refuse to address the responses because you feel “attacked”.

That’s not debating.

Let’s see if maybe we can begin again.

From post #38:

Im going to teach them about all of it, including the bad, just like how the americans STOLE and KIDNAPPED africans, to be slaves. Then I’m going to teach them how wrong it is. If we don’t learn from our history we are doomed to repeat it.

Dragging the unanswered questions back to the surface:

#39:

I assume you are going to forget to teach that it was Dutch slave traders buying slaves from Islamic Africans. Am I wrong? Will you also teach them about how America fought a war (the only country to do so) which ended slavery? Will you teach them who put blacks in the Supreme Court? Secretary of State? Chairman JCS? Will you teach them wha tthe leftists did to these people? Will you teach them that there are still countries who have legal slavery (and the US is not one of them)?

Will you teach them that families like mine risked eerything and gave their lives bringing freed slaves through the Underground Rail Road?

Or is my assumption correct?

#40:

Hmmm.. some revisionist history?

#41:

Slave trade for Africans and English women (yes… white English women were also sold…) was started by the Dutch traders.

Or perhaps you thought those colonialists were busy sailing all over the seas looking for slaves?

#42:

Are you going to teach them how Obama’s ancestors engaged in the slave trade?

October 17th, 2008 at 8:44 am
Scott
 66Reply to this comment  

DAMMIT! Now I’ve got that Great American Melting Pot song stuck in my head.

October 17th, 2008 at 9:27 am
 67Reply to this comment  

@voter: The Grat Amaerican Salad is what is destroying this country. Think Balkanization.

Multiculturalism will be the downfall of our great country. Idnetitity Politics is what the Democrats use, African-Americans, Females, Homosexuals, and every other goup you can think of. This balkanizes the country into little groups.

As a conservative, I look at who the person is and could care less what color, ethnicity, or religion they are. It is the person adn what they believe in.

This is the fundamental difference with Liberals and Conservatives. Liberals look at groups of people, conservatives look at indivivuals.

October 17th, 2008 at 9:38 am
 68Reply to this comment  


“In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person’s becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American…There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn’t an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag… We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language… and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people.”

– President Theodore Roosevelt 1919

October 17th, 2008 at 9:46 am
 69Reply to this comment  

@Aye Chihuahua: That is an awesome quote. Perfectly explains everything.

October 17th, 2008 at 9:54 am
Uddercha0s
 70Reply to this comment  

@Aye Chihuahua: Actually Aye, I think voter’s issue is with my previous question that caused her to step in it

@voter: Are you going to teach your children to embrace the Hungarian culture that oppressed (Magyarization) the Slovak people?

No, it wasn’t meant to attack. I started to write a response but I just can’t be bothered to get indepth. Voter, you were a convienient path for me to make a point. See, many people suffer from an “identity crisis”. Most cultures that exist in America were oppressed in some form or another in their homelands (the native Americans didn’t even have to travel). That’s what makes us America, the salad/melting pot.

I’m American. I’m an American of Slovak descent. My grandfather was born in 1885 under Magyarization. Revisit the link I provided earlier for exactly what that means. My grandfather (and thus myself) was fortunate to get out at the turn of the century. It was just several months ago that I found out where he came from and what my surname really is. Much like Joe’s grandparent’s, my grandparents too were “freed” by America.

I’m babbling. I guesss my point is, “you can’t judge a book by it’s cover”. Yes, my skin is “white”. Does that make me unable to relate to the tribulations of other cultures? Does that mean that I must feel “guilt” because people that “look like me” did bad things? Should I run around with tears in my eyes blaming you, voter (since you have Hungarian ancestry), for what occured to my ancestors 3 generations ago or should I applaud the fact that in 2 generations, the grandsons of an illiterate peasant, are college educated, homeowners who achieved it without help from the government?

Yes, I’m passionate about America. Like Joe, it brings tears to my eyes when I think of a 16 year old boy leaving his country and ethnic cleansing to come to a strange land where he did not know the people or the language. By the grace of God, the courage of that boy and the founding fathers, I’m American! I fear the CHANGE that Obama wants to bring to this country and those who are following him blindly. I look back into my history and see what could be.

My story is no different than millions of others of every race and creed. Every wave of immigrants were taken advantage of but given the oppourtunity to make a better life for themselves.

Don’t forget your history, but don’t be chained by it.

October 17th, 2008 at 10:19 am
 71Reply to this comment  

@Uddercha0s:

Udder,

You’re correct.

I meant to include your question in the list.

I missed it and then real life intruded and I was unable to get back until now.

It’s plainly evident to all of us who are paying attention that voter/Erika only engages in output.

As a side note, has anyone ever noticed how few complaints you hear from the Jewish people?

They, as a nationality, a race, and a culture have suffered more across the span of history than any other group of people on the face of the earth.

Yet, they quietly persevere and move forward with tremendous success and determination.

Perhaps the application of the Jewish people’s focus on the future and a little less clinging to the negatives of the past would benefit other groups as well.

October 17th, 2008 at 10:38 am
Uddercha0s
 72Reply to this comment  

As a side note, has anyone ever noticed how few complaints you hear from the Jewish people?

Hows about the Chinese brought here to build the railroads?

As I listtem to the news now, I realize, I’m a western Pennsylvania racist who clings to his Bible and guns.

October 17th, 2008 at 2:39 pm
Uddercha0s
 73Reply to this comment  

It’s plainly evident to all of us who are paying attention that voter/Erika only engages is output.

Yeah, I’ve gave my input.. oops.. no response? Voter… talk to me. Joe, come on.. I laid my life out there.. talk to me…

Nah, it won’t happen. I don’t care. I hope the next time a “black” man looks at a “white” man that he thinks tho… maybe his family went through the same sh*t

October 17th, 2008 at 2:54 pm
 74Reply to this comment  

@Uddercha0s: Well as a Catholic I should be pissed at most of the country for how they treat Catholics, especially in the MSM.

Or how bad the Polish were treated, or the Irish, or Germans during WWII even though my grandpa was in the Army, or the Portrail of Ghengis Khan and the Mongols (since they raped and pillagedd Poland and every family has Monglian genes in them) or the Vikings.

It is good to know your past andyour culture, but to dewll on the past is not good and can only divide us in America. That is why the hypenated-American crap is badfor thuis country. Should I say I am a Polish, German, Lithiuanian, Mongolian, Norwegian, Scotch Irish, English American??? Whew,I do not think I missed any.

See, my family has a rich diversity of cultures in it. My grandma wrote a geneology book of our family going back to when my Grandpa’s family left Germany, or was it France at the time? We do not really know because after every war, it changed hands.

Knowing one’s geneology and the cultures that come with it is great, and should be taught,but not in schools, that isfor family members to tell you about. Schools should teach about America and its culture, there are times where othercultures should betaught also, but the main focus should be on America. We are Americans first and foremost, as Teddy speech eloquently says @Aye Chihuahua:

And yes the United States has not always been the good guys or took the high road, Slavery and the Forceful migration of Indians comes to mind, but the US has been the beacon of Freedom and Hope for the world. What other countries would actually build up the countries that they just defeated in battle??? What other countries would defeat a country and not make them a State in their Empire???

And people wonder why I would never vote for the Democrats that always put down America for everything we have done for this world. Maybe they should ask the Czechs, the Poles, the Lithuanians, or any other Eastern European country what America means to them, or how they have run their countries after the defeat of the USSR. They know what it is like to live in tyranny and looked towards the US for the way to structure their govenments.

October 17th, 2008 at 3:05 pm
Uddercha0s
 75Reply to this comment  

See, my family has a rich diversity of cultures in it. My grandma wrote a geneology book of ur family going back to when my Grandpa’s family left Germany, or was it France at the time? We do not really know because after every war, it changed hands.

Excuse me…. your grandma knows me?

October 17th, 2008 at 3:27 pm
Uddercha0s
 76Reply to this comment  

@stix1972: Sorry, I see what happened and you fixed the typo.

Yes, you are entirely right. I don’t dwell on my past, I don’t forget it though. I pull it out on ocassions like this cuz.. you know what.. there’s more of us out here. I really only think of my heritage during holidays while I’m eating ethnic foods! Haha. Pirohi.. or as some pronounce pieogies.

I have always believed, and still do, we’re all rejects.. and America accepted us and believes in us. Why do we want to point out our differences when our similarities are much closer? We are the best in the world. I make no excuses. The tired, poor, huddled masses, yearning to be free..

I’m off my soap box. I’m off this board for now. I can not continue because it is unhealthy for me. Good luck and the best of wishes to all. Until we meet again…..

October 17th, 2008 at 3:35 pm
 77Reply to this comment  

@Uddercha0s: It’s ok I usually have to look at it after I post it becasue I am not the greatest at typing. Especially if it is a long post

Here is another nugget, should my dad’s family be mad at my grandpa’s ethnicity since my grandpa is German (but was in the US Army in WWII) and my dad is 100% Polish, his family came straight from Poland after WWII.

We can go on and on on historical atrocities that people have done, but I tend to look forward.

October 17th, 2008 at 3:43 pm
Uddercha0s
 78Reply to this comment  

@stix1972:

We can go on and on on historical atrocities that people have done, but I tend to look forward.

My point exactly. Does that mean that I, as a white American, no longer have to suffer “white guilt”?

October 17th, 2008 at 3:47 pm
voter
 79Reply to this comment  

@Uddercha0s: You seem intent on trying to take what I’ve been saying in a different direction, I’m not saying ANYTHING negative, I’m saying we should embrace our differences. How would we do that if our difference got lost in the wash (or should I say melting pot)? I can’t believe that it is so hard for you to see what I an saying. Don’t you understand that it would also help us with our international relationships to understand other cultures, so that we can in turn RESPECT those cultures. If we stay in our own little corner in the world and don’t let any outside info come in, then we are like North Korea. If we don’t teach and pass down to our children, who happen to be our future, the knowledge and traditions, it will get lost forever from our America. It IS up to the family to teach and pass down the teachings of tradition and knowledge and pride of our background, not the schools, I haven’t said any different. It is up to the schools however to teach major history. But the self pride is the families role. I don’t understand how what I’m saying goes to a place of “should I be mad because this happened” or anything like that, you guys are totally missing what I’m saying, or you are just trying to project your own negativity on me and my post. What ever it is, you are totally missing the mark. Are we so vein to believe that America is the only country with culture and traditions and knows how all should live their lives? Are we so vein to believe that theres no need to get to know our neighbors, and where they come from, or what they are all about? I’m not saying anything about skin color, I am talking about culture, which has no color.

-Here is another nugget, should my dad’s family be mad at my grandpa’s ethnicity since my grandpa is German (but was in the US Army in WWII) and my dad is 100% Polish, his family came straight from Poland after WWII

No you should embrace the history and teach it to your children.

October 17th, 2008 at 6:50 pm
voter
 80Reply to this comment  

@Uddercha0s: My above post wasn’t only to you, it was to all that responded to me, sorry if it seemed like I was singling you out. ;)

October 17th, 2008 at 7:34 pm
Wordsmith
 81Reply to this comment  

voter #64:

@wordsmith: I hear you and I can even relate to most of it, I agree with some of it. The problem is its an extreme. Yes I am an american as my children are, but america is made up of MANY cultures. If we just relate to and learn about AMERICA, and lose apart of ourselves, then we move backwards. We then move away from what america is all about.

Erika,

I understand what you are conveying. It’s not that I’m against celebrating diversity and the appreciation of the beauty of other cultures. My mom is Japanese; I love Japanese culture, participate annually in Nisei Week on behalf of Japanese-Americans. Japanese pop culture has infiltrated our culture in ways similar to how American culture can be found influencing cultures all over the globe. I’m not afraid of it. I don’t believe our love affair with Japanese anime, sushi, martial arts, etc. dilutes our own culture. Cross-cultural pollination enriches, not detracts; and the attempt to preserve rigid tradition and cultural purity, similar to the Amish, is not only an exercise in futility (just look to the Amish), but also leads to cultural stagnation. It’s what happened to China when they closed their borders to the influence of outside “barbarians”. Change and evolution are a natural part of life and of history. The flow of it can’t and shouldn’t be stopped from happening.

But what I deplore is this narcissistic need to impose one’s culture upon an established culture, as somehow being of equal historic significance to that particular society. For instance, western culture and traditions contributed to the shaping of our nation. Not just its founding, but also its succeeding 200 year history. It wasn’t Hindu culture; it wasn’t Indonesian culture; it wasn’t Arabic culture; it wasn’t Mongolian culture. So excuse me if I accept Christmas and Easter, but not Ramadan and Raksabandhana. Our “Judeo-Christian” heritage and traditions are at the very core of our nation’s establishment. It’s at the heart of who we are. Yet groups like the ACLU seek to dissolve and eradicate, to minimize and replace much of what made us who we are. Of what gave us our ability to tolerate and welcome diverse cultures and religious practices. Being American means assimilating into the culture that is recognized as “American”. It’s not just “baseball and apple pie”. Today, it’s also “California rolls, Chinese acupuncture, and eastern Yoga”. But such blending and mingling of differences happens naturally, based upon popularity. Over time, it is absorbed and ASSIMILATED into the American mainstream culture. What multiculturalists want to do is minimize the significance of what they feel is “white European”-dominant cultural establishment, and say, “all cultures are equal in significance”. This dilutes, not enriches American culture. Just imagine if English were no longer accepted as the national language- seen as “the language of Britain” and of white Europeans. A nation cannot survive as a nation without the commonality of language to bond us together, along with the importance of borders, and a recognized culture- a culture made up of many influences, but those influences assimilated into the pre-existing one- not existing separately, alongside it.

What if I, as a Thai-American, demanded that we have not an “Asian history month”, but a “Thai-American history month” (“Asian” not being narcissistic enough for my ego, self-esteem, and self identity)? I recognize that black Americans have a special place in American history, and black history month, at least initially, was a needed idea to bridge some of the divide and establish racial healing. But at a certain point, it becomes a crutch. To truly move beyond race and not be enslaved by a sense of victimization and carry along a chip of anger on the shoulder- leading to a self-fulfilling perception of racist persecution, I agree with Morgan Freeman who feels there shouldn’t be a “black history month”, but that it should be a part of American history. What if every ethnic and special interest group, not wanting to feel left out and having bruised egos and issues of identity crisis, begins lobbying for a “Jewish history month”, “Armenian history month”, “Islamic history month”, Russian history month”, “Irish history month”, “German history month”, etc. ? Where does it end?

If there doesn’t seem like there is equal representation of actors in Hollywood who are black, maybe that’s because our society isn’t made up of 50% white, 50% black? So if only 15% of leading roles are going to black actors….well, to me, that sounds about right. But who the hell cares? I don’t go about whining that I do not have Asian role models in lead Hollywood roles to make me feel good about myself as an Asian. My on-screen hero would be John Wayne, Bruce Wayne, Humphrey Bogart, or Indiana Jones. They happen to be white, but so what? My football hero when I lived in Texas at the age of 14, was Tony Dorsett, a black running back. The NFL and NBA are disproportionately made up of black and white athletes. Affirmative action and feel-good liberal policies that would seek to bring in more Asian athletes into those two leagues, just for the sake of “equal representation” would be preposterous beyond belief. Athletes should make it in a sport, based upon their athletic merits. Not for the sake of meeting ethnic quotas. If I’m not tall enough, if I can’t play well enough to make up for my “vertical challenge”, tough luck. Don’t lower the rim, don’t drop the standards, don’t do me a “favor” with affirmative action.

Wow….I really strayed off on a tangent, didn’t I? Sorry. Gotta refocus here….

I do believe when somebody makes a choice to come to america, they have an obligation to learn our “culture”, and abide by our laws that we have. But they also have a responsibility to thier children to not forget and totally lose who they are. Otherwise all the wonderfull traditions and beliefs that are different from america will be lost and forgotten forever in our america.

I can appreciate that, and even agree with it. So long as the culture of your new home- of the country you want to call your own- is the one you cultivate loyalty and a sense of belonging to. That means learning, acquiring, devouring everything the country is and stands for. Assimilation takes priority. It doesn’t mean forgetting one’s roots. It doesn’t mean maintaining a sense of pride in one’s historical ancestral roots. Speaking more than one language is good, so by all means, pass on one’s native language to the next generation. BUT, definitely make the established common language THE priority. For multiculturalists to suggest that those who wish to establish English as the official language of the United States are “racists” and “prejudiced against ethnic minorities” is preposterous beyond belief, and so misguided it defies logic.

Should we expect to learn these things from text books? We need to embrace ALL cultures, and differences, without prejudice, in order to do so we need to educate our children, and they will do the same and so on. If we do not do this, racism will only get worse, because there will be the unknown, that we are scared of, and in turn will reject.

We should not just become bland all mesh together and lose the individuallity. You can’t fully respect something untill you understand it. I like the salad analogy, because nothing loses its individual taste, and still becomes part of something bigger and better.

I think you’re right that we probably agree more than we disagree.

I prefer the melting pot analogy. Salad, the way I choose to perceive it, is an analogy for segregation and separatism. Of course, the way you are interpreting the salad analogy, works for me, too.

Sorry for not staying focused and ranting off topic on my own “chip on the shoulder” pet peeves.

October 17th, 2008 at 8:33 pm
voter
 82Reply to this comment  

@Wordsmith: I have to say, when I write a post, I look forward to your response, I can respect what you have to say and your point of view, even the parts that I don’t totally agree with. I want to respond in more detail to your post but I am so tired, and need to go to bed, I will respond in the morning.

October 17th, 2008 at 8:55 pm
 83Reply to this comment  

Why should I respect other cultures that do not hold American values. Freedom of press and freedom of religion. Not all cultures are equal. The Western philosophy of thought is better than the thought of Asia or the Middle East. They have a culture based off of ancient thought. The Middle East and Socialist countries have no freedom of the Press and Freedom or Religion. Why should I respect that????

October 17th, 2008 at 11:42 pm
voter
 84Reply to this comment  

@stix1972: Oh my gosh are you really serious? You have to learn and respect your own history first. Your ancestors and America’s. America is the greatest nation on earth with out a doubt. But you can’t deny her tainted past. From when other countries opened up their prisons and set their criminals free to colonize the US. To the genocide on the American Natives, for hundreds of years majority of the countries economy and progress was on the backs of an enslaved race. Yes before you jump down my throat and say we made that all better by fighting to free the slaves, remember not all of America fought to free them. It was a civil war, there were a fair number of Americans that did not want to have freedom for all. I’m not saying other countries don’t have their terrible acts upon humanity, I am talking about the USA. Have we moved forward as a country, YES, but their is no limit to the progress. America tries to portray itself as the top dog in areas of progress, democracy, and education and many other things, yet we are so arrogant that we don’t respect other ways of life. For example Asia and the Middle East, you may not agree with me, but their way of life, whether we agree with it or not, has been around long before we were even a thought. Who are we to say they live their life wrong and we have all the answers. When we have our own problems here. How do we even know that our democracy will work with in their culture. Why do you think such a large portion of the world does not like us? We pass judgement on others but are easy to forget our own tainted history. I am getting off point here, Asia and the Middle East are rich in traditions and culture that their people live and think is right. We don’t have to agree with it to accept it and to respect it. But until we (the human race) learn about and respect other cultures, and ways of life, there will be more and more atrocities on humanity. And it all starts with learning our own culture and history. If we just keep the frame of mind that “I don’t like them or how they live, so I’m just going to hate them or force our way of life on them,” we are going to further alienate ourselves from the rest of the world. (I realize that the frame of mind I described was ridiculous, but think about it, it is how we have been dealing with others.) Now that said, I think that America is the greatest nation on earth. We still have some work to do, and progress to make. My point is we all have differences, and that is great. We should respect and embrace those differences. We are not the only ones with all the answers.

October 18th, 2008 at 6:19 am
 85Reply to this comment  

So I am supposed to respect a culture that treats women as chattle, forces females to marry as young as 9. No, you earn respect, you do not just give it. This goes against everything that I was brought up to believe in. We should respect women as equals and not user them as property.

Yes they have a old culture and many interesting customs. But they have not left the 7th century. That is what I do no respect. If they would actually join the modern world, I would respect them more.

Or am I to respect the Kim Jong Il and his hell hole. What is there to respect from there. My mom lived in South Korea and loved the people and traditions that they had. they were very friendly and very hard working people. That is somethong to respect. She though the Japanes were rude and did not help her at all.

And you keep on bringing up what the USA did in the past, yes we need to know what the US did to the Iindiand, the Japanese during WWII, and many other bad things that we did as a nation, but ti dwell on it is wrong and destructive.

October 18th, 2008 at 9:36 am
Wordsmith
 86Reply to this comment  

stix:

And you keep on bringing up what the USA did in the past,

voter:

I’m not saying other countries don’t have their terrible acts upon humanity, I am talking about the USA.

October 18th, 2008 at 9:42 am
 87Reply to this comment  

@Wordsmith: I am talking about what is going on now, not what happened in the past. Why dwell on what happened in the past. As a historian, we should all be pissed at everyone. The world is a cruel place and many atrocities all over the place happened throughout time.

October 18th, 2008 at 9:46 am
voter
 88Reply to this comment  

@stix1972: So I am supposed to respect a culture that treats women as chattle, forces females to marry as young as 9. No, you earn respect, you do not just give it. This goes against everything that I was brought up to believe in. We should respect women as equals and not user them as property.

You are coming from the premise that these different countries are trying to earn your respect. They are just living thier lives, like they have been for thousands of years. I am not saying that I agree with thier customs when it comes to women, but that is thier custom, and has been forever.

-But they have not left the 7th century. That is what I do no respect. If they would actually join the modern world, I would respect them more.

Again, whose to say what the right way to live is, its been working for them, what do we care? It was not to long ago, that women in the USA couldn’t even have a credit card or vote, let alone, the right for equal pay, that YOUR candidate voted AGAINST.

-You are right is wrong to dwell, but there is a difference in dwelling, and remembering, before you cast stones at others.

October 18th, 2008 at 10:10 am
voter
 89Reply to this comment  

@Wordsmith: Hey, how do you put the pretty yellow border around the quotes?;)

October 18th, 2008 at 10:28 am
 90Reply to this comment  

damn I had a response all typed out and went into the unknown,

I sould have copied it before, but I am too hung over to try and rememebr what I all said

@voter:

You are coming from the premise that these different countries are trying to earn your respect. They are just living thier lives, like they have been for thousands of years. I am not saying that I agree with thier customs when it comes to women, but that is thier custom, and has been forever.

That is all fine and good, but have they changed with the times like Western Civilization has done?
Yes women were treated as second class citizens just a few decades ago, but we have seen that that was wrong and have changes. Most in the Middle East have not.

@voter: Hey, how do you put the pretty yellow border around the quotes?;)

You go to the arrows under comments and click on quote.

October 18th, 2008 at 10:38 am
voter
 91Reply to this comment  

@stix1972:

You go to the arrows under comments and click on quote.

just checking, to see if it worked, the only thing that says quote is b-quote

October 18th, 2008 at 10:53 am
 92Reply to this comment  

@voter:

You go to the arrows under comments and click on quote.

just checking, to see if it worked, the only thing that says quote is b-quote

that is what I meant. You can add links also.

October 18th, 2008 at 10:55 am
voter
 93Reply to this comment  

@stix1972: Sweet, thank you I am new to this.

October 18th, 2008 at 10:57 am
 94Reply to this comment  

@voter: no problem. I just figured it out a little while ago also

October 18th, 2008 at 11:00 am
 95Reply to this comment  

Voter/Erika. So sorry… really must correct your perceptions once again.

It was not to long ago, that women in the USA couldn’t even have a credit card or vote, let alone, the right for equal pay, that YOUR candidate voted AGAINST

Too simple a talking point in the context of reality, girl. The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2007-08 was first HR 2831. Here’s the history of all actions on the bill.

The bill was never voted on in the Senate. It was read/introduced in the Senate 8/2007, and placed on the legislative calendar. (remember who was in majority power in 2007?)

It was referred to the Senate Judicial Committee (Leahy chair), but Reid tried force a premature end to the debate (cloture) about amending the bill and force a vote. McCain wasn’t present for this cloture/procedural vote. But, if present, would have voted no to ending the debate.

There’s your “voted no against equal pay for women” claim…. Not much substance to it, eh? First fact, he wasn’t there to vote.

Second fact, it wasn’t about the passage of the bill, but a vote to cease debate and force the vote. A bill that would potentially increase lawsuits immensely as written.

If you don’t know what the bill was about, it was constructed to reverse the Supreme court decision of Ledbetter v Goodyear, who ruled that the statute of limitations for Ledbetter to file a discimination claim had expired (she worked 19 years, and filed only a couple of months before she retired).

On legal scrutiny of the bill, the decision was 5-4, but correct with letter of law. So Congress was trying to correct the flaw.

Problem is the way they corrected it in the Fair Pay Act of 2007-08 went the other extreme… allowing for class action suits, and lawsuits with an infinite end of time (i.e. statue of limitations that renewed with every paycheck receipt).

Thus the Republicans who opposed it and wanted to debate changes, preferring to address some of these loophole problems before passage.

Even WaPo said the bill needed tweaking before passage to prevent unintended consequences. Problem is, the Dems wouldn’t allow any debate on changes. More of their “my way or the highway” attitude.

A vote where McCain wasn’t present to vote for continue, or end, the debate.

~~~

BTW, from your sundry posts, I don’t know if you are American by birth, or if English is your second language. But some things to pocket for your future comments.

Chattel means personal property and was applicable, but spelled incorrectly. But then I wondered if you trying to say treating women as “cattle” in your post #88. Frankly, treating women either as cattle or chattel (not chattle) is unacceptable. Both expressions would have conveyed your opinions well. So you might want to add chattel to your bank of words.

Also, something futile is “in vain” (not vein). English can be a real pill about that stuff… here three words with multiple meanings. Vane (as in weather vane), vein (as in blood line like artery or vein) and vain (as in proud or futile). I believe English is considered one of the more difficult languages to learn because of these dual/multiple meanings.

Not trying to be condescending, mind you. Just would like to help you present your thoughts more cogently.

October 18th, 2008 at 11:31 am
voter
 96Reply to this comment  

@MataHarleyThank you for the lesson, but if you had read the posts above the one you are correcting, you would see “chattel” was another person’s comment, and I was quoting him. You are right about vain, vein, though, you still got my point. But if you are going to correct me, take a look at the other posts, from the other users, it should keep you busy for awhile.

October 18th, 2008 at 11:52 am
voter
 97Reply to this comment  

I messed up on the block quote thing, I think I will stick to my old fashion copy and paste.

October 18th, 2008 at 12:03 pm
 98Reply to this comment  

@voter: Yes I am known for my typos. My mind goes faster than my fingers.

October 18th, 2008 at 12:05 pm
 99Reply to this comment  

Ah yes, I see, Erika. My computer was down for 24 hours, and catching up on this thread is time consuming indeed. So I missed Stix’s comment, and it was prior to your learning to use the blockquotes (or b-quote). So I missed the fact it was a Stix repeat because of the visual presentation, separating his comments from yours.

Useage of the “blockquotes” (the yellow borders) is what makes it easy to see visually what is *other* people’s (or article) quotes, differentiating from your own ensuing comments.

i.e. use them to quote others, or a previous quote from yourself. It’s not generally used to enclose your entire comment. Highlight just what you want to appear in the yellow block.

And of course I got your points. I would say that most here agree that learning about heritage and other cultures is not a bad thing to teach children. Two things are important, tho. Make sure you are teaching them correctly. And make sure you are not indoctrinating “hate America” into the future generations. This country, despite all it’s human flaws, is still major cuts above other nations for civil rights.

Which is why most of us jumped on you for saying:

Im going to teach them about all of it, including the bad, just like how the americans STOLE and KIDNAPPED africans, to be slaves.

This is incorrect historically. Americans were not the slave traders doing the kidnapping. They were, however, purchasers of slaves in that era. Nor was that practice confined to just America (both pre American Revolution and post). And they also purchased English white women as well.

That practice by humans was despicable… but hardly confined only to America.

October 18th, 2008 at 12:06 pm
 100Reply to this comment  

Well the weird thing, Stix, is that either “chattel” or “cattle” would have been appropriate. It was just hard to guess which one you meant, and that Erika repeated. LOL

And Erika… don’t give up on the b-quote. Experiment with it as I suggested… highlight the words you want in the yellow box first, then click on the b-quote. It will do the rest.

October 18th, 2008 at 12:09 pm
 101Reply to this comment  

@MataHarley:

Well the weird thing, Stix, is that either “chattel” or “cattle” would have been appropriate. It was just hard to guess which one you meant, and that Erika repeated. LOL

I meant chattel

October 18th, 2008 at 12:14 pm
voter
 102Reply to this comment  

Now you like thinkers, lets get along. I’m still here so you have someone to argue with.

I hope you know I am joking.

October 18th, 2008 at 12:19 pm
 103Reply to this comment  

@voter:
I think that whatever we say, we are going to come at it at the opposite end. I do get where you are coming from, but I think that it is wrong, and I am assuming vise versa

Not to say we shouldn’t argue or debate, but as some point it is pointless to just say the same things over and over when we are not going to change each others minds.

I think that it is great to know one’s culture and that of our ancestors. I have a vary diverse background, I have blood from all over the world. I have Viking blood in me, I have Mongolian blood in me, I got Scotch, Irish, English, Polish, German, Norwegian blood in me. And they at various times have been at war and done atrocities to each other.

But as I said before, I am an American first and do not want to be hyphenated. It is what is breaking this country apart. The Melting Pot that was America is gone and we are only Balkanizing our country with all the Identity Politics that all politicians use.

October 18th, 2008 at 12:33 pm
 104Reply to this comment  

Ya know, you’re not that far out of whack with many of us, Erika. You’ve expressed your lukewarm support for Obama by calling him the “lesser of two evils”. Frankly, many of us feel that way about McCain. This makes most of us slightly left or right of center.

You seem to prefer Biden, tho I haven’t a clue why. Your comments about Palin indicate you’re perhaps not as well read on her actual record as a commissioner/mayor/governor.

Leaving these differences aside, this election will be one about taking a serious step into socialism in our government, or not. I’m not getting from you that you are a socialist at heart. When then only leaves whether or not you see Obama’s policies and political philosophy as socialist/Marxist.

There are many Obama supporters that are anti-socialism. They get around this by refusing to admit his policies are just that. Hard to believe they can be blind to this considering:

his history,

his alliances and friends,

his educational philosophy confirmed by both his website pushing social and economic justice, and his CAC alliance with Bill Ayers,

his membership in the DSA/New Party in the early 90s (and continued relationship with them until they disbanded in 1998),

and topped off with his attendance to socialist movement meetings at Cooper’s Union during his college years

Makes it easy to see why the words “spread the wealth” slipped out so easily in response to Joe the plumber. And that also disproves that his socialist mentality has somehow faded with age.

October 18th, 2008 at 12:35 pm
voter
 105Reply to this comment  

I don’t really have anything to say, just experimenting with the b-quote.

October 18th, 2008 at 1:17 pm
voter
 106Reply to this comment  

it didn’t work, why is this so hard for me? lets try in again

Makes it easy to see why the words “spread the wealth” slipped out so easily in response to Joe the plumber. And that also disproves that his socialist mentality has somehow faded with age.

October 18th, 2008 at 1:19 pm
voter
 107Reply to this comment  

I DID IT YEA I am so proud of myself, now I can go back to my weekend with my family. Have a good weekend everybody.

October 18th, 2008 at 1:20 pm
 108Reply to this comment  

ta daaaa! Congrats, and enjoy your family.

October 18th, 2008 at 1:23 pm
Wordsmith
 109Reply to this comment  

I “corrected” your blockquotes from some of the earlier attempts, to make it easier reading, voter. Looks like you figured out the problem, which is you probably were just hitting the B-Quote key, without highlighting what it is you wanted to quote. Since you have your own blog, I’m sure you can figure out, too, how to just type in the html codes, or move them around where you need ‘em placed.

You should be able to edit, as well, if you make a mistake, shouldn’t you?

October 18th, 2008 at 5:02 pm
Wordsmith
 110Reply to this comment  

stix #87:

@Wordsmith: I am talking about what is going on now, not what happened in the past. Why dwell on what happened in the past.

I was merely pointing out what looked to have been missed, which is that voter concedes other countries have committed their fair shares of atrocities; but what she wanted to talk about are the atrocities by our own country; not singling us out. Since you wrote in comment #85:

And you keep on bringing up what the USA did in the past, yes we need to know what the US did to the Iindiand, the Japanese during WWII, and many other bad things that we did as a nation, but ti dwell on it is wrong and destructive.

I thought you might have missed where Erika (voter) covered herself on this; not that you were also making a point of “not dwelling on the past”.

October 18th, 2008 at 5:08 pm
 111Reply to this comment  

@Wordsmith: must have been the hang over. I was not thinking straight.

I get over zealous at times also. I am getting sick and tired of everyone talking down about the USA.

October 18th, 2008 at 5:18 pm
Wordsmith
 112Reply to this comment  

It was not to long ago, that women in the USA couldn’t even have a credit card or vote, let alone, the right for equal pay, that YOUR candidate voted AGAINST

And Mata wonders why she’s earned the reputation “resident fact-checker”….I didn’t know all of that, Mata.

Liberal hypocrisy? – “With McCain Women Make More” The Trib-Review:

Rogers points to Senate Records showing that women working in Sen. Obama’s senate office were paid an average of $9,000 less than men.

It appears that in the McCain senate office, the women on average are paid more than the men.

Also, something that Dennis Prager says, comes to mind:

The left envisions an egalitarian society. The right does not. The left values equality above other values because it yearns for an America in which all people have similar amounts of material possessions. This is what propels the left to advocate laws that would force employers to pay women the same wages they pay men not only for the same job but for “comparable” jobs (as if that is objectively ascertainable). The right values equality in opportunity and strongly believes that all people are created equal, but the right values liberty, a man-woman based family and other values above equality.

October 18th, 2008 at 5:26 pm
Wordsmith
 113Reply to this comment  

And what of the “76 cent myth”?

The 76-cent myth
Do women make less than men? The wage-gap ratio isn’t the best gauge for pay discrimination, and overemphasizing it can undermine an important issue.

By Jeanne Sahadi, CNNMoney.com… senior writer
February 21, 2006: 5:51 PM EST

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com…) – When you have a legitimate point to make, it can undercut your argument to rely heavily on a sound-bite statistic that easily can be misinterpreted.

When it comes to pay discrimination, the one statistic you hear over and over is that women make only 76 cents for every dollar a man earns.

To the average person, that ratio gives the false impression that any woman working is at risk of being paid 24 cents less per dollar than a man in the same position.

But all the wage-gap ratio reflects is a comparison of the median earnings of all working women and men who log at least 35 hours a week on the job, any job. That’s it.

It doesn’t compare those with equal work, equal training, equal education or equal tenure. Nor does it take into account the hours of overtime worked.

The wage gap, in short, “is a good measure of inequality, not necessarily a measure of discrimination,” said Heidi Hartmann, president of the Institute for Women’s Policy Research.

Unequal doesn’t always mean unfair. Much depends on the reasons for disparity. And, Hartmann notes, “parsing out (the reasons for the gap) is difficult to do.”

Factors may include: more women choose lower-paying professions than men; they move in and out of the workforce more frequently; and they work fewer paid hours on average.

Why that’s the case may have to do in part with the fact that women are still society’s primary caregivers, that some higher-paying professions require either too much time away from home or are still less hospitable to women than they should be.

However, while those factors account for a good portion of the wage gap, actual pay discrimination likely accounts for the balance, experts say.

Hartmann believes discrimination accounts for between 25 percent and 33 percent of the wage gap. Compensation specialist Gary Thornton, a principal in the HR management consulting firm Thornton & Associates, figures at least 10 percent to 15 percent does.

Whatever the breakout, there certainly are numerous studies that show discrimination — however unconscious — still exists. For instance:

* A recent Cornell study found that female job applicants with children would be less likely to get hired, and if they do, would be paid a lower salary than other candidates, male and female. By contrast, male applicants with children would be offered a higher salary than non-fathers and other mothers.

* A recent Carnegie Mellon study found that female job applicants who tried to negotiate a higher salary were less likely to be hired by male managers, while male applicants were not.

Then there’s the phenomenon of wages going down when more women move into a field.

Take human resources, now a female-dominated profession. I asked Thornton if he thinks female human-resource managers today are paid as well as he and his male colleagues were 15 years ago. “Not at all,” he said. He estimates that in inflation-adjusted terms they’re paid about 20 percent less.

Why? “That’s the million-dollar question,” he said. “There are many things at play. But we still have a long way to go to change unintentional discrimination.”

A few years back, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology found that its women scientists were routinely given less pay, space, funding and rewards than their male colleagues.

“Did anyone intentionally give them smaller offices and labs? Probably not. It’s just one of those things (that) accumulate and add up to barriers and institutional discrimination,” Hartmann said.

Even though discrimination may not be intentional, Hartmann said, companies should be intentional about regularly reviewing their compensation structures and promotion records to correct for patterns of discrimination.

But maybe there can never be absolute parity because often there are many non-discriminatory variables that cause a differential in pay. What determines someone’s pay isn’t just a title and job description, but also performance, tenure and market forces — e.g., what it takes to get a desirable job candidate to accept a position.

And then there are situations in which a company may do well by a female employee but still be vulnerable to charges of discrimination and reverse discrimination.

In an article, Warren Farrell, author of “Why Men Earn More: The Startling Truth Behind the Pay Gap — and What Women Can Do About It,” tells of a company that promoted good women employees faster than men. But consequently the women moving into the higher positions often were paid less than men in the same position because the men had greater tenure at the company.

Or, Thornton noted, a man’s request for pay equity is more likely to fall on deaf ears if he finds out a newly hired female colleague is paid more. But if a woman made the same request, it’s more likely to be treated seriously, due to fear of a lawsuit.

If anything is clear cut, it’s that pay equity can be a complex issue. And it’s one that a single, overly generalized statistic does little to elucidate.

October 18th, 2008 at 5:32 pm
 114Reply to this comment  

LOL! Another case of “do as I say, and not as I do”, don’t you think, Word “da man”?

It is always weird that a candidate campaigns on something, and his campaign staff performs exactly the opposite.

Then again, isn’t this a case of “judgment”???

October 18th, 2008 at 5:34 pm
Wordsmith
 115Reply to this comment  

It is always weird that a candidate campaigns on something, and his campaign staff performs exactly the opposite.

Al Franken comes to mind, since he’s now campaigning. He’d criticize corporations for not hiring more minority workers; and yet he himself, after conducting hundreds of interviews, ended up hiring 14 people, all white.

Just stfu, already, you angry little man.

October 18th, 2008 at 5:42 pm
Wordsmith
 116Reply to this comment  

stix #111:

I am getting sick and tired of everyone talking down about the USA.

It’s amazing how people- even non-Americans (like they’ve received their knowledge of American history from Howard Zinn and Noam Chomsky text books, as well) will blast away at America’s past, as if we hold a unique place in the annals of racism and slavery; and without ever crediting us and Britain in our “uniqueness” at fighting against the institution of slavery and bringing the slave trade to an end.

October 18th, 2008 at 5:53 pm
voter
 117Reply to this comment  

@MataHarley: Okay, so I’m back. I just wanted to respond to your post, when you said McCain was a no vote. McCain said in the last debate, a no vote is a vote against. And, he has spoken out against the bill.
also here, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/04/23/mccain-opposes-equal-pay-_n_98342.html

Just to let you know where I got my thoughts, or should I say “facts”.

October 18th, 2008 at 6:11 pm
 119Reply to this comment  

OMG, Erika! You’re becoming a community addict, girl! LOL

BTW, the “links” work just like the b-quote. You can type the text you want to read… in other words, it doesn’t have to be the URL… then highlight those words and click on the “ext link”.

Now.. I know you got your facts from HuffPo or other liberal tabloid site. Only they can pass off a “no vote” as “a vote. (In fact, I have your “think progress” link archived under my research on this “old” subject on McCain)

But, if you’ll notice what I specifically said in my post on this legislation

It was referred to the Senate Judicial Committee (Leahy chair), but Reid tried force a premature end to the debate (cloture) about amending the bill and force a vote. McCain wasn’t present for this cloture/procedural vote. But, if present, would have voted no to ending the debate.

Remember that this is a NO to more debate… not to the bill. And yes, as the bill was structured with infinite potential class action suits and without amendment, he would have voted nay. It’s nothing but a trial attorney’s dream otherwise.

There’s your “voted no against equal pay for women” claim…. Not much substance to it, eh? First fact, he wasn’t there to vote.

So you see, I already covered your response in advance. But I love that you are not only playing with the formatting, but back checking your own opinions. *very* good sign.

October 18th, 2008 at 6:30 pm
ChrisG
 120Reply to this comment  

@Wordsmith #116

Word,

Even worse is the fact CNN-International makes the US version of CNN look non-partisan and actually interested in facts. CNN-I was the one who made up a story about my death 2 blocks from me in Iraq. Plain as day and with a smile on their faces. Most of their “reporting” read frighteningly close to “1984″s ‘Ministry of Truth’.

Unfortunately, that is what the world gets to see about the US: Far left education/indoctrination, re-enforced by far left propaganda and outright lies. This adds to the anti-US sentiment of an “upstart” nation that dares to think itself worthy of its ‘betters’. But if they do not get their foreign aid, food, and US Military aid…. all hell breaks loose.

Not surprisingly, nations which were enslaved under the USSR think differently. And to some others who read this and mis-understand, No, I do not think the US is better than everyone else… we ARE everyone else demographically. But Yes, having been around the world, I think the USA, overall, is better than many others and much better than all of our foes.

October 18th, 2008 at 10:16 pm
Wordsmith
 121Reply to this comment  

voter #84:

we are so arrogant that we don’t respect other ways of life.

Erika, I do see some of the arrogance you speak of. And Chris and Erika, I also believe in the veracity of your statement that “America is the greatest nation” (a sentiment expressed by both of you).

Some might read that as arrogance. What I read it as, is an expression of love and patriotism for one’s country (set aside for a moment, the fact that, by any objective criteria and scientific standard of measurement, is also true ;) ).

If a Canadian or a Frenchman, a Brit, a Brazilian expressed the same sentiment about their home, where they come from, I really wouldn’t expect any less and can have admiration for a person who shows love, pride, and loyalty to the place that nurtured him. It’s empathy. It’s like someone saying to me, “I have the greatest family on earth”, or “I have the best mom”. There’s nothing to argue against. Just accept the statement and smile, knowing that we each feel the same way about our families (unless you belong to a dysfunctional one…in which case you wouldn’t be saying it, now would you?).

Erika #84:

To the genocide on the American Natives,

Erika,

What happened to Native Americans with the arrival of Europeans to the New World, was horrible. (I wonder who they themselves might have possibly displaced?) But I would hesitate labeling what occurred as “genocide”.

for hundreds of years majority of the countries economy and progress was on the backs of an enslaved race. Yes before you jump down my throat and say we made that all better by fighting to free the slaves, remember not all of America fought to free them. It was a civil war, there were a fair number of Americans that did not want to have freedom for all.

The Indian population by the end of the 19th century amounted to about a quarter million. What decimated their population- about 75 to 90%- wasn’t violence at the hands of white imperialists, but contagious diseases for which they had no immunity. In some cases, entire tribes were wiped out. Were white Europeans responsible for bringing most of these diseases? Yes. Was it their intent to slaughter the Native American Indians through contagious diseases? No. So “genocide”, I feel, is an inappropriate and inaccurate description, just as it would be true to charge white settlers and colonialists with waging “biological wafare”.

I also reject the romanticizing of Native Americans as a whole, as somehow being eco-friendly environmentalists and peacenik “noble savages” who never engaged in warfare, brutality, and atrocities, unprovoked. Torturing prisoners was a regular practice in Indian cultures. (But lets not judge, but remain respectful).

Did we also engage in torture? Yes. Neither side is exempt of the moral high ground. Did Indians have legitimate grievances to do what they did to white settlers? Yes, of course. But their savagery is also independent from what was done unto them. On a moral scale, I don’t see them as being any more noble than us; they just happened to be on the losing side of history’s momentum. Even back then, we had a conscience (good people like yourself), and there were outcries and shame regarding our conduct and what was happening to the Indians.

Shameful acts of brutality and warfare? Yes. Genocide carried out as official policy of the U.S. government (or colonial government)? No.

I know you are focusing only on American history, and only brought this up in passing, but delivered in the context of world history- and not to excuse it nor minimize the travesty, but to contextualize it against the framework of human history- what happened to Native Americans happened on 6 other continents from the beginning of man’s history: Shifting populations, displacements, cruelty, invasion and conquests. Not unique to American history.

I think the overall nobility of our American ancestors speaks for itself. Otherwise, we would not be who we are today, if our compassion and civility didn’t mature from our past. It had to begin somewhere.

for hundreds of years majority of the countries economy and progress was on the backs of an enslaved race.

Well….I’ve risked coming across as an apologist for atrocities against Native Americans…..why stop there?

Slavery in any shape or form: Wrong. Bad. Despicable. Evil. That said….

The institution of slave labor did not make us a wealthy nation. The states that enjoyed the greatest prosperity were those that were among the first to free their slaves.

October 18th, 2008 at 10:28 pm
datdude92
 122Reply to this comment  

it’s amazing. We teach leaders of business to read chinese Art of war, or to to take a japanese approach in employee engagement, but that is not anti-american. We teach black kids history that honestly reflects them and their american history and it’s anti-american.

What these kids are learning is the true history of america which is both beautiful and horrific. they are learning that they are americans just as any if not more than in one else in this coutry. they are also learning how to see america auhtenically.

Let’s be honest, intergration was never about the people it was about the economics. whites could and would frequent black establishments. taking their funds up to harlem. While blacks could only spend their money in their own neighborhoods. The segragated trade balance was off. Intergration did more to destablize the black community in the US, then Jim Crow. If blacks could of had fairness under the law and right to vote and right not to be terrorized , have equal education funding we would be segergrated today.. which was a pro-american stance 40 years ago.

Just because a black child is taught africans built the pyriamids and the greeks were educted by africans from the university of Alexandria in egypt doesn’t make them radical, it realy makes the authentic.

October 23rd, 2008 at 3:22 pm
 123Reply to this comment  

@datdude92: Autentic???? How can it be authentic if it is false history. The Greeks were never taught by Egyptians. That is a false statement and if any historian say that, they shouldnot be allowed to teach. the Jews and Christians were the ones that taught at the University of Alexandria, and the Egyptian Muslims were the ones that burnt it to the gound.

And some Nubians may have helped with the beginnings oft he Pyramids, and they built them before the Egyptians, but the Egyptians were the ones that perfected the Pyramids.

October 23rd, 2008 at 4:52 pm

Leave a reply

Name (*)
Mail (will not be published) (*)
URI
Comment

If your comments get caught in spam a lot please log into your registered account before trying to comment again. You can email me if your comment is caught in spam

 

Identity Verification: If you wish to verify your commenter identity, so no one can steal it, click the below button: