Michael Wolfe

Study up. Stand up. Speak up. Pray up!

Posts Tagged ‘Wright’

« Previous Entries

None Dare Call It Socialist: HR3590 “Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act”

Posted by americana83 on April 7, 2010

Are the claims of socialism new? Have government intrusions into medicine been opposed before Obama tried them? Does it matter whether Obama scoffs at those who call his plan “socialist?”

First, I will say that this bill does not create “single payer” government run healthcare. However, it does pave the way by extending current government “care” systems (and their under-reimbursement of health care providers), subsidizing insurance using tax payers’ money, and enacting a whole list of mandates on insurance companies, individuals, and employers. These mandates will increase the cost of insurance, possibility to the point of unsustainability, paving the way for the government to “save the day” by stepping in and seizing outright control of the entire medical industry. This, coupled with the push to legalize millions of illegal aliens, many of which would then qualify for coverage and the decreasing incentive for people to study to become doctors will combine to create the one thing everyone said would never come: health-care rationing.

Recently, the APHA (the American Public Health Association) made the following assertions about the recently rammed, bribed, blackmailed, forced through Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (aka ObamaCare) and its subsequent reconciliation (and college loan take over) package:

Not only will the law extend health insurance coverage to an additional 32 million uninsured Americans, provide subsidies to help individuals purchase health insurance, prevent insurance companies from discriminating against individuals with pre-existing conditions and strengthen the Medicare program, it will also provide billions of dollars of funding for public health and prevention when it is fully implemented. In fact, the new Prevention and Public Health Fund created by the law will provide $500 million for prevention, wellness and public health activities beginning this year.

Lets look at some of these elements individually:

extend health insurance coverage to an additional 32 million uninsured Americans.

Since this number seems to fluctuate, that is not so much the issue, however this bill will force those who do not want insurance, typically the young and the healthy to purchase a product they neither want nor need. If you make $13 per hour and live in Ohio, the government already deducts about 25% of your pay (not counting sales taxes, gasoline taxes and other non-payroll taxes). 1 out of every 4 hours you work, you are working on behalf of the government. Now they are telling you how to spend your hard earned money, whether you want to or not. Sure the penalties are fairly small right now, but remember, the Federal Income Tax started out as a paltry 1% tax! My how big and hungry the tax beast has grown, and the more you feed it, the hungrier it becomes! (oh, and the whole “federal government forcing you to buy something” is UNCONSTITUTIONAL).

But wait, there’s more:

…provide subsidies to help individuals purchase health insurance…

More of your tax dollars are going for NEW entitlement programs! (Never mind that current ones are unsustainable in their funding levels!). Charity has its place, and it is the VOLUNTARY donations from people who WANT to help to organizations that do more than just give out free goodies. Self proclaimed communist Van Jones’ railing demand of “give them the wealth!” can almost be heard echoing through the pages of this bill. Just like other government social programs, the costs associated with this will skyrocket beyond the CBO estimates and will help much less than the vaunted 32 million uninsured.

And now, we make insurance more expensive with this, causing more people to need to rely on Big Brother to help them:

prevent insurance companies from discriminating against individuals with pre-existing conditions and strengthen the Medicare program

While this sounds nice, it will raise the cost of everyone’s insurance. They can’t be charged more than everyone else, so the costs are spread to everyone. Again this is not charity. This is taking more money from hard working men and women.

it will also provide billions of dollars of funding for public health and prevention when it is fully implemented. In fact, the new Prevention and Public Health Fund created by the law will provide $500 million for prevention, wellness and public health activities beginning this year.

I do not want the government spending my money on condoms and telling me what to eat or how to exercise. Most areas already have local public libraries and charitable organizations that offer health information. It is about control. As the government foots more and more of the bills for health insurance/health care, it will demand more and more control and say in how and what individuals eat, when they exercise, and just about every field that is touched by health.

Also, with the president and other people who are part of the problem complaining about the deficit, where is this 500 million dollars going to come from? Well, the 10% tanning tax for starters. Then, in the spirit of promoting better insurance plan offerings (sarcasm), ObamaCare gives us a 40% tax on the best health insurance plans, with a few years delay for unions, who’s members generally have good plans and who might otherwise revolt against the leaders of their international unions.

Now lets look some bitter pills scattered throughout this bill (this is just a small sample of all the things hidden throughout the bill’s 2409 pages + 900 (amendment).

Full bill text: http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h3590/text

SEC. 3308. REDUCING PART D PREMIUM SUBSIDY FOR
14             HIGH-INCOME BENEFICIARIES.
15     (a) INCOME-RELATED INCREASE IN PART D PRE-
16 MIUM.—

The title for this section actually says it all. It doesn’t matter that you’ve paid the same amount into the system as everyone else, now you get to pay more. More spreading wealth around, just like Obama promised.

Section 4201:

(B) ACTIVITIES- Activities within the plan may focus on (but not be limited to)

(i) creating healthier school environments, including increasing healthy food options, physical activity opportunities, promotion of healthy lifestyle, emotional wellness, and prevention curricula, and activities to prevent chronic diseases;

Ok, our schools are already failing academically, now we are supposed to sacrifice more class time so kids can run and jump around? More time telling them how wonderful they are (building up their self esteem/emotional wellness), and more telling them how to eat and what to eat? Every time federal control over the public schools increases, the quality of the education declines. Soon parents won’t have to take responsibility for anything, the state will raise their kids from cradle to graduation. Oh, and the federal constitution does NOT give the federal government authority over education, that is a right reserved to the states, respectively  or the people.

(ii) creating the infrastructure to support active living and access to nutritious foods in a safe environment;

(iii) developing and promoting programs targeting a variety of age levels to increase access to nutrition, physical activity and smoking cessation, improve social and emotional wellness, enhance safety in a community, or address any other chronic disease priority area identified by the grantee;

(iv) assessing and implementing worksite wellness programming and incentives;

(v) working to highlight healthy options at restaurants and other food venues;

(vi) prioritizing strategies to reduce racial and ethnic disparities, including social, economic, and geographic determinants of health; and

What does this mean? It sounds like an opportunity to spread more wealth around, that is until the feds run out of our wealth to spread around…

(vii) addressing special populations needs, including all age groups and individuals with disabilities, and individuals in both urban and rural areas.

I would encourage anyone interested in the realities of socialism and how it has come to the point where the federal government feels it has the authority (it doesn’t) to mandate individuals to purchase insurance to borrow, buy or check out the book: None Dare Call It Treason by John A. Stormer. It recounts the heartbreaking saga of betrayal of the nation’s most cherished ideals and laws in the 20th century.

Here are a couple of very relevant exerts from this book published way back in 1964:

Magruder’s high school text, American Government, as mentioned earlier uses nearly every classical propaganda trick to confuse students into accepting socialism. Consider this non-sequitur under the heading, Medical Service Under Our System of Free Enterprise:

In a democracy we believe in evolutionary methods rather than the revolutionary methods of a dictatorship; and under our system of free enterprise, competition improves the standard of service and tends to reduce the cost. Therefore, instead of jumping right into socialized medicine, why not have the Government support projects such as the following. (pg 670).

If free enterprise medicine works so well, and Magruder acknowledges that it does, why consider socialized medine at all, either immediately or by the backdoor approach Magruder recommends. He advocates approaching socialized medicine through such steps as federal aid for training doctors, federal funds for hospital construction, and government payment of hospital costs for lengthy illnesses.(pg 110).

Then, on page 169, Stormer quotes approvingly this statement:

Compulsory social insurance is in its essence undemocratic and it cannot prevent or remove poverty. The workers of America adhere to voluntary institutions in preference to compulsory systems, which are held to be not only impractical, but a menace to their rights, welfare, and their liberty. Compulsory sickness insurance for workers is based on the theory that they are unable to look after their own interests and the state must use its authority and wisdom and assume the relation of parent and guardian.

and this one:

I want to tell you socialists that I have studied your philosophy…I have heard your orators… I have kept close watch upon your doctrines for 30 years and know how you think and what you propose. I know too what you have up your sleeve. Economically, you are unsound; socially, you are wrong; industrially, you are an impossibility.

Since the publishing of this book, the American welfare state has grown exponentially. Step by step creeping socialism has consumed the private sector, followed surely by expanding government, increasing taxes, and a continuing reduction of the realm of freedom. President Obama, with his incessant push for this healthcare bill, has accomplished the greatest harm to our constitutional republic since FDR first got people hooked on government cheese using the New Deal. Every elected official who voted for this healthcare bill has joined previous public officials who have violated their oath of office for the sake of expanding government power and subverting the constitution.

The answers to my introductory questions: No, Yes, NO! It doesn’t matter what Obama calls himself, what his policies are called, or even who suggested them first. They still have the same deadly affect on our freedoms, our way of life, and the long-term viability of the American experiment. Obama does not offer “hope” for America, Obama doesn’t offer anything new, just the same tired old socialist ideas that Americans have been fighting since Woodrow Wilson signed the Federal Reserve Act and the income tax became law.

Oh, and one more link: the Communist Party USA’s magazine, people’s world, just offered their praise of Obama’s health care bill.

President Obama’s new health-care law is a “historic victory” that can lead to socialized medicine and “single-payer” health-care legislation, boasted Juan Lopez, chairman of the Communist Party USA in Northern California.

Posted in politics | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments »

Obama on race, what you may have missed…

Posted by americana83 on July 29, 2009

Obama and his campaign have talked about “post-racial” America. He ran a campaign on based on “unity” despite dividing his followers along racial lines on his campaign website. Consider the following brief exerts from Obama’s book, “Dreams from my father.” Whether Joyce is real, or a “composite” created by Obama (which is possible based on the preface, his feelings on racial identity are clear. Given his bi-racial heritage, he chose to adopt an African cultural identity. Certainly, no one can deny him that. And yet, when someone else decides to define themselves how they want, Obama lashes out viciously eviscerating them for not taking a “side” that he feels they should take (all of the exerts are from page 98-100 in the 2004 softback edition).

In his own words:

our worries seemed indistinguishable from those of the white kids around us. Surviving classes. Finding a well-paying gig after graduation. Trying to get laid. I had stumbled upon one of the well-kept secrets about black people: that most of us weren’t interested in revolt; that most of us were tired of thinking about race all the time; that if we preferred to keep to ourselves it was mainly because that was the easiest way to stop thinking about it, easier than spending all your time mad or trying to guess whatever it was that white folks were thinking about you. So why couldn’t I let it go? I don’t know. I didn’t have the luxury, I suppose, the certainty of the tribe. Grow up in Compton and survival becomes a revolutionary act. You get to college and your family is still back there rooting for you. They’re happy to see you escape; there’s no question of betrayal. But I hadn’t grown up in Compton, or Watts. I had nothing to escape from except my own inner doubt. I was more like the black students who had grown up in the suburbs, kids whose parents had already paid the price of escape. You could spot them right away by the way they talked, the people they sat with in the cafeteria. When pressed, they would sputter and explain that they refused to be categorized. They weren’t defined by the color of their skin, they would tell you. They were individuals.

It is clear by this that Obama has a disdain for those who reject a collective racialist identity for an individual one. It gets even better in the next section:

That’s how Joyce liked to talk. She was a good-looking woman, Joyce was, with her green eyes and honey skin and pouty lips. We lived in the same dorm my freshman year, and all the brothers were after her. One day I asked her if she was going to the Black Students’ Association meeting. She looked at me funny, then started shaking her head like a baby who doesn’t want what it sees on the spoon.

First, he builds up her physical attractiveness, especially to the black men. Then he goes for the kill. She doesn’t want to get involved with the BSA, so he converts her from a woman to a baby, ignorant and unwilling to get involved with something he believes is good. Throughout his book, Obama reveals how he self determined his own ethnic identity, molding himself into his own perception of an African man, not only rejecting the Anglo blood within himself, but connecting it with the rape of Malcom X’s mother. However, when Joyce attempts to chart her own ethnic identity, Barack slams her hard:

“I’m not black,” Joyce said. “I’m multiracial.” Then she started telling me about her father, who happened to be Italian and was the sweetest man in the world; and her mother, who happened to be part African and part French and part Native American and part something else. “Why should I have to choose between them?” she asked me. Her voice cracked, and I thought she was going to cry. “It’s not white people who are making me choose. Maybe it used to be that way, but now they’re willing to treat me like a person. No-it’s black people who always have to make everything racial. They’re the ones making me choose. They’re the ones who are telling me that I can’t be who I am….”

Its clear from this that Joyce has a diverse heritage. Why should she be forced to exclude any part of it (including the “something else” which Barack so smoothly derides. Barack makes it seem like the “they” she is talking about is African-Americans or blacks as a collective whole. But this is deceptive. The “they” she is referring to here is very likely the racialized radicals like Obama and his mentor Frank Marshal Davis and later on Reverend Wright. The radicals must have constantly harassed Joyce about being a sell-out or “uncle Tom” pressuring her to despise the totality of her heritage and cast her lot with the racialized marxists (as we shall see later in the paragraph after the discussion on Joyce). Obama continues to rip Joyce:

They, they, they. That was the problem with people like Joyce. They talked about the richness of their multicultural heritage and it sounded real good, until you noticed that they avoided black people. It wasn’t a matter of conscious choice, necessarily, just a matter of gravitational pull, the way integration always worked, a one-way street. The minority assimilated into the dominant culture, not the other way around. Only white culture could be neutral and objective. Only white culture could be nonracial, willing to adopt the occasional exotic into its ranks. Only white culture had individuals. And we, the half-breeds and the college-degreed, take a survey of the situation and think to ourselves, Why should we get lumped in with the losers if we don’t have to? We become only so grateful to lose ourselves in the crowd, America’s happy, faceless marketplace; and we’re never so outraged as when a cabbie drives past us or the woman in the elevator clutches her purse, not so much because we’re bothered by the fact that such indignities are what less fortunate coloreds have to put up with every single day of their lives-although that’s what we tell ourselves-but because we’re wearing a Brooks Brothers suit and speak impeccable English and yet have somehow been mistaken for an ordinary n***er.

Don’t you know who I am? I’m an individual!

So, based on the fact that Joyce refused to join herself to one organization, Obama concludes she avoided black people. He goes on to deride integration, painting “nonracial” culture as merely a white thing. This paragraph also makes the ignorant assumption that all cabs are driven by white racists, all women are fearful of black men, and all “coloreds” are less fortunate. Of course his derision of individuals and individualism has become a trademark of his campaign and presidency, most recently highlighted by his attempt to transform a confrontation between a cop and a belligerent uncooperative man into a national race war. Obama deals in collectivist mentalities not personal freedoms, liberties, or individuals. This is explained by the paragraph immediately succeeding the above, where he arrogantly claims to “understand” people like Joyce:

The truth was that I understood her, her and all the other black kids who felt the way she did. In their mannerisms, their speech, their mixed-up hearts, I kept recognizing pieces of myself. And that’s exactly what scared me. Their confusion made me question my own racial credentials all over again, Ray’s trump card still lurking in the back of my mind. I needed to put distance between them and myself, to convince myself that I wasn’t compromised-that I was indeed still awake. To avoid being mistaken for a sellout, I chose my friends carefully. The more politically active black students. The foreign students. The Chicanos. The Marxist professors and structural feminists and punk-rock performance poets.

He only understood her in relation to his socialistic mindset. He basically says that Marxism is part of an uncompromised “black” identity! Then, he slams people who identify as “individuals” instead of collectives as being “confused.” His radicalization is also demonstrated in his choice of friends. “Birds of a feather flock together.”According He chose Marxists and radicals as his friends, and he did it carefully. Here he succeeds in tying his ethnic identity (Black) to radical ideologies (Marxism and leftist activists). Therefore, by his definition, Joyce, or any other multi-racial or African who rejects his mixture of leftist radicalism to embrace individualism or a western mindset would be a “confused” individual “selling out” their ethnic identity.

Someone with a truly post-racial mentality would not attempt to use race as a bludgeon or wedge to force someone off of the beliefs they hold dear. Barack Obama is stuck in a racist marxist mindset that has no place in an America that has been making continued strides towards a standard of true equality as far as laws and government can create such a standard. He himself is proof that progress only goes as far as individuals are willing to take it. For it takes only one person to revive the specter of government sanctioned racism, one judge that puts race above justice. Yes, an individual can almost single handedly turn the ride of progress back, and then use the resulting discord to further his degenerate ends. Sonya Sotomayor, Van Jones, Maria del Carmen, and other racists and Marxists are being selected for positions high in Obama‘s administration. Over two hundred years of progress in relations between Americans of diverse colors are being systematically dismantled by the man who was heralded as the culmination of racial unity and equality.

Posted in Barack Obama, deception, Election 2008, intolerance, news, Obama, Presidential, Racism, Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments »

“Church of Christ Minister complains other churches “take sides” in politics.

Posted by americana83 on October 1, 2008

I was made aware of this story by one of my friends about a group of pastors making their opinions known about Barack Obama from behind the pulpit.

Funny it was a United Church of Christ minister complaining about this. Interesting how one of their member churches, Trinity United Church of Christ NEVER makes any statements that might be construed as supporting a certain Barack Obama or eviscerating others….Todays letter is X and today’s word is Hypocrite! Perhaps Rev. Eric Williams should tend to his …  Read Moreown denomination before denying others the opportunity to do what his does repeatedly and sometimes in the most blatant and crude ways! In fact it was only earlier this year when the beloved Reverent Wright and his guest speakers made their sweet *sarcasm* comments about Hillary and did their best to support Barack.
Well Church of Christ, I guess your chickens are coming home to roost. If only you’d kept your most vocal pastors quiet enough to stay under the radar, perhaps the others would not have discovered their freedom to speak what they think. And now you not only want to silence them, but you also wine about “members of the clergy are ‘exchanging their historic religious authority for a fleeting promise of political power,’ to the detriment of their churches.”
Empty words! Empty words!

Posted in Barack Obama, Christianity, deception, Election, Election 2008, Obama, Presidential | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Some posters for the last legs of the campaign trail

Posted by americana83 on September 1, 2008

I decided to post and share my extra large high rez NoBama posters! Suitable for printing up to at least 11×17!

Get the message out, and let me know if you’ve posted these anywhere! (warning: will torture dial-up connections, middle class incomes, and bourgeois elements!

Commie Change Classic

Change Isn’t Always Good

Posted in Barack Obama, deception, Election, Election 2008, Obama, Presidential, social spending | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Dr. Cone’s Black Liberation Theology: Love Redefined.

Posted by americana83 on June 30, 2008

Note: This is the beginning of a series of posts I hope to make regarding the Theology of Trinity United Church of Christ, Barack Obama’s home church of ~20 years. TUCC’s pastor Jeremiah Wright based his theology and values system on Dr. Cone’s Work: Black Theology & Black Power. These are the values that Wright used when he mentored Barack Obama, and these are the underpinning of the beliefs and values that could influence the next President of the United States. I have and will expend considerable amounts of time both researching and writing these articles, not because I have a personal vendetta against any man, but because I believe that the truth must be known. Dr. Wright, when questioned on Fox News rigorously used Black Liberation Theology as a defense of his values system, and railed against his questioners for their ignorance of it. I wish that they had done their homework, because knowledge is power.

Dr. Cone’s Black Liberation Theology: Love, Redefined.

What is love? Love is the foundation of the Christian Gospel. Without Love, God would not have cared if His creation had no way to heaven, and thus would have had no reason to provide a way though Christ. According to Webster’s, Love is:

To regard with a strong feeling of affection; to have a devoted attachment to; to feel great tenderness for; as, to love one’s family. 2. To regard with the feelings of one sex towards the other; to be tenderly affected toward; to be in love with; to be passionately fond of. 3. To delight in; to have great pleasure or interest in…(Webster’s pg 1007)

What does the Bible say about love? There are many passages about love, and they reflect closely to how Webster’s defines love.

Is love based on precondition?

But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him. For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life. (Romans 5:8-10)

We love him, because he first loved us. If a man say, I love God, and hateth his brother, he is a liar: for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how can he love God whom he hath not seen? And this commandment have we from him, That he who loveth God love his brother also. (1 John 4:19-21)

Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbor, and hate thine enemy. But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust. For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same? And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? do not even the publicans so? (Matthew 5:43-47)

It is because of verses like these that Dr. Cone must go through great efforts to redefine Love, and thus redefine Christian love. He rightly asserts that a “new way of doing theology” is needed, because without it “there will always be this barrier between Black Power and Christian love(Cone, 50). Thus  he seeks to reinterpret “the message of salvation(49)” so that it will be palatable to those within the Black Power movement, whom Cone has no desire to make Christians out of, nor to “twist their language or to make an alien interpretation of it.(Cone 48).” While he has no problem preserving and accurately interpreting the words of man, he apparently sees no problem with forcing an interpretation on the scriptures that, as he willingly admits is alien to the life of Christ, and thus to the Biblical interpretation of love.

Cone goes through the two parts of the Great Commandment:

Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets. (Matthew 22:37-40)

He rightly says that when God’s love has gripped a someone that they should behave as if Christ is at the core of his being (Cone, 51). However, just a page later,  he says that, “because God is a God of power; of  majesty, of might, to love man means that he wills that the black man “reflect in the immediacies of life his power, his majesty and his might (Cone, 52).” He also erroneously says that “to respond to God’s love in faith means that he accepts as truth the new image of himself revealed in Jesus Christ (Cone, 52). The Bible teaches that our response to God’s love is to believe on Him:

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.(John 3:16-18)

That the man becomes a new Creature, and does not merely emulate an image of such is a Bible truth:

Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new. (2 Corinthians 5:17)

We do not see an image in Christ, by accepting Christ in faith, we become a new creature, God’s spirit indwells us and empowers us to do  his will, to show his love and deliver his message to a world in need. As far as power we as individuals are called to:

Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves: be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves. But beware of men: for they will deliver you up to the councils, and they will scourge you in their synagogues; And ye shall be brought before governors and kings for my sake, for a testimony against them and the Gentiles.(Matthew 10:16-18)

It is not for us to attempt to emulate God’s power and might. Throughout the Bible, God does occasionally use people to show his power, as was the case with Moses and the plagues. However, the showing of power was related specifically to giving glory and honor to God, as Pharaoh was scoffing and rejecting God’s revealed will. It was not an act channeled through the unbelieving, or the worshippers of false gods. Since Dr Cone has “no desire to make Christians out of those who see no relationship between their understanding of truth and Jesus Christ (Cone, 48), he asserts that God’s power, majesty and might can be demonstrated though sinful unrepentant man by accepting a new image “revealed in Christ.” Many religions have images of Christ,

Cone asserts that the black man take Paul’s teaching of being a “new creature” literally by telling him to “glorify blackness” as an acceptance of the black self as a creature of God. (Cone, 53).” It is absolutely clear that Dr. Cone misses the concept of the “new creature” The new creature is a direct product of the new birth, which Jesus described in his discussion with Nicodemus:

There was a man of the Pharisees, named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews: The same came to Jesus by night, and said unto him, Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God: for no man can do these miracles that thou doest, except God be with him. Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God. Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother’s womb, and be born? Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.(John 3:1-7)

The new creature is spiritual in nature. Man was born once as flesh and blood. The birth of the “new creature” is a spiritual event, an event open to “whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord.” It has nothing to do with the glorifying or uplifting of the physical self.

By combining these unbiblical distortions of the new creature and God’s love, Cone has set the stage for his radical redefining of the word Love.

Dr. Cone says that “to love the white man means that the black man confronts him.” He goes on to assert that whites see blacks as “its” and the black man must confront them as a “Thou” The emphasis is not on the person hood, but on the confrontation as the manifestation of love between the “races.”

Cone further asserts that,

The black man must, if he is not to lose sight of his new-found identity in Christ, be prepared for conflict, for a radical confrontation. As one black man put it: “Profound love can only exist between two equals. The new black man refuses to assume the It-role which whites expect, but addresses them as an equal. This I where the conflict arises(Cone, 53).

There is no grounds for a “radical confrontation” for one not to lose sight of his identify in Christ. In fact, the one time where it was attempted, Jesus himself rebuked Simon Peter:

Then Simon Peter having a sword drew it, and smote the high priest’s servant, and cut off his right ear. The servant’s name was Malchus. Then said Jesus unto Peter, Put up thy sword into the sheath: the cup which my Father hath given me, shall I not drink it? (John 18:10-11).

Also, consider the actions of Stephen who’s preaching of righteousness resulted in severe injustice:

Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye. Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted? and they have slain them which showed before of the coming of the Just One; of whom ye have been now the betrayers and murderers: Who have received the law by the disposition of angels, and have not kept it. When they heard these things, they were cut to the heart, and they gnashed on him with their teeth. But he, being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up steadfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God, And said, Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God. Then they cried out with a loud voice, and stopped their ears, and ran upon him with one accord, And cast him out of the city, and stoned him: and the witnesses laid down their clothes at a young man’s feet, whose name was Saul. And they stoned Stephen, calling upon God, and saying, Lord Jesus, receive my spirit. And he kneeled down, and cried with a loud voice, Lord, lay not this sin to their charge. And when he had said this, he fell asleep.(Acts 7:51-60)

Probably one of the most damnable heresies which Cone proclaims is the assertion that “profound love” can only exist between equals. With how much the Bible talks about God’s love for man, this sets up two situations, each equally heretical. Either God does not truly love man, and the Bible lies regarding this, or man is equal with God, in which case man has no need of God, or his salvation. So the question arises, are we gods, or is God a liar? Man’s fall in Genesis was at the beckoning of the serpent to “become as gods.” Cone here introduces that man is equal with God again offering up the same temptation, the quick and fleshly way of a bloody confrontation to lift up the self, the flesh.

It is this heresy that allows him to encourage the carnal demonstration of “God’s power” by ungodly men. He continues by saying that the “christian” love of whites makes the black man a nonperson. Cone goes on to say:

The black man’s response to God’s act in Christ must be different from the white’s because his life experiences are different. Christian love is never fully embodied in an act(Cone, 55).

This is false. Christian love was fully embodied in one act: the selfless giving of Christ on the Cross. To willingly give one’s self for his friends is defined as the greatest love in the Bible:

This is my commandment, That ye love one another, as I have loved you. Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends. (John 15:12-13)

From this the greatness of Christ’s sacrifice is magnified, for not only did he give his life, but he did so, “While we were yet sinners (Romans 5:8)!” Such an act, by God completely embodies Christian love! There is no greater love, or demonstration of love!

Now compare this to the example of love offered up by Dr. Cone:

The violence in the cities, which appears to contradict Christian love, is nothing but the black man’s attempt to say Yes to his being as defined by God…If the riots are the black man’s courage to say Yes to himself as a creature of God, and if in affirming self he affirms Yes to the neighbor, then violence may be the black man’s expression, sometimes the only possible expression, of Christian love to the white oppressor(Cone, P 55).

Where in the Bible does it say we are to affirm our selves? Where in the Scriptures does it say that violence is a legitimate expression of Christian love to the neighbor? Remember, that Dr. Cone subscribes to Malcolm X’s description that theologically, calling whites the devil is not far from the truth. All whites are oppressors in the eyes of Dr. Cone (Cone, P 24).

However, Cone also insists that

White people should not even expect blacks to love them, and to ask for it merely adds insult to injury. “For the white man,” writes Malcolm X, “to ask the black man if he hates him is just like the rapist asking the raped…’Do you hate me?’ (ellipses in original quote) The white man is in no moral position to accuse anyone else of hate.” Whatever blacks feel towards whites or whatever their response to white racism, it cannot be submitted to the judgments of White society.

Basically Cone’s definition of the love offered up to whites from blacks is the same as the hatred which whites should expect from blacks. Based on Cone’s definitions:

Love = Hate

Hate = Love

Further, he has attempted to insulate his perspective from any criticism. However, despite his linguistic and mental gymnastics, Love, Christian love does not equal hate.

Love suffereth long, and is kind; love envieth not; love vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up, Doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil; Rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth; Beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things.(1 Corinthians 13:4-7)

It is clear from Dr. Cone’s radical redefining of Christian love, that his primary purpose is not to show how Christianity is compatible with Black Power, as he claims(cone, p48), but rather to conform the image of Christ and his love to that of a movement that is diametrically opposed to Christian Love and everything it stands for.

For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. And if ye be Christ’s, then are ye Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise. (Galatians 3:26-29)

References:

Black Theology & Black Power, 8th Printing, Nov 2006. James H. Cone (c) 1997 James H. Cone.

Webster’s New 20th Century Dictionary of the English Language, Unabridged. (c) 1949 The World Publishing Co.

The Holy Bible, KJV

Posted in Barack Obama, Christianity, Election 2008, Obama, Presidential, Racism | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments »

“Everyone else did it” A brief critique of NPR’s defense of Dr. Wright

Posted by americana83 on April 5, 2008

source: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=89109217 by Michel Martin

Michel Martin

Photo: Stephen Voss
© 2007

The article begins with a description of how the author’s debate coach and fellow teammates remained silent when the white host of a reception ushered her into the back room to socialize with the maid 20 years ago, and how the coach recently apologized for doing nothing.

She then launches into an attack on Dr. Wright/Obama critics by saying this:

Setting aside the fact that I question how many of these people have actually darkened the door of any house of worship in recent years…

Which leaves unanswered the question of her own “darkening the door of any house of worship.” Obviously she didn’t learn too much about theology at her United Methodist Alma mater, and how many elements of Dr. Cole’s “liberation theology” contradict scripture. (I plan on doing a thourough analysis of liberation theology once I get my copy of Dr. Cole’s book Black Power, Black Theology which is the foundational theology of Obama/Wright’s Trinity United Church of Christ).

Following this, she gives several illustrations of “good” people sitting idly by while others do or say bad  things. She then provides this example:

They would have sat right there just like countless good people do when their friends tell racist jokes, or when their employers refuse to return phone calls of applicants they suspect might be black or brown, or refuse to rent apartments or work with people of color.

So, because prominent figures tolerated evil, and “countless good people” tolerate evil, makes it okay to tolerate evil? I know I’m not the only person who has taken a stand against racist jokes in the work place. Last year there was a trio of neo-nazis whom I had the unpleasant experience of working with. They constantly slurred Jews, Blacks and Women using the worst possible words. They even asked me if I was Jewish. While I never considered them friends, or even open to having their minds change on those matters, they did know where I stood, and that I was offended by their vulgar langauge and hateful graffiti. You better believe it was hard. God does provide strength to say the truth when a  lie would be easiest of all. At least one person I worked with at the time did try to flatter them, by saying how she would never let her child date outside his/her “race.”

What people do or don’t do doesn’t mean an action should be considered acceptible.

She goes on to say this:

I know this because, over the years, I have met too many white people who have told me how they have struggled to find their voices when language or behavior emerges from people they otherwise care about — who they believe to be good people — but who, nevertheless, say or do things they think are wrong.

Okay, but Dr. Wright’s incindiary statements have spanned decades. Not only has Barack Obama tolerated these things, but he has exposed his children to them, again and again. I can say that, if my pastor started preaching incindiary racist hate then I would walk out of the message. If, after private discussion, I could not get him to see what the bible says about race, then I would leave that church and never go back.

Just because the right thing is hard to do, doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be done.

The author closes her article with this:

Obama has explained his relationship with his minister at some length. One is free to accept or reject his explanation. But please — spare me the moral outrage about what you would have done or would do in that situation. And just do it.

Obama has had an intimate friendship/mentorship/spiritual relationship with this man for decades. His repeated claims of ignorance and “amnesia” can only be believed if he never attended Trinity United regularly, as he has said he did. He has no excuse, regardless of what others have “gotten away with.” If he is a “devout Christian” who “prays to Jesus” as he as claimed several times, then he would have made some kind of stand. Jesus never prayed for the damnation of the Roman Empire, and they crucified him (in a legal sense).

There are plenty of things Barack Obama has done and supported that deserve “moral outrage” and I will do my part to expose them.

Posted in Barack Obama, Bible, children, Election, Election 2008, intolerance, Jesus, news, Obama, Racism, Spirituality | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Obama’s “Race” Speech Hailed by People’s World Weekly, Official Communist Party USA Magazine

Posted by americana83 on March 28, 2008

From People’s Weekly World(Exert, bolding added by me, italics my words):

Barack Obama’s appeal to the people to join in building a “more perfect union” touched a deep chord among millions of voters weary of division and hate peddled by the corporate ultra-right and their Republican agents in Washington.

It would seem Obama’s mentor has been peddling the hate as of late. His “retirement” and resignation from Obama’s religious outreach both seem all too convenient(as well as the expunging of the “black values system from Trinity’s website). His peddling of hate against whites and division finally became too much. Odd the Communists would rally against hate and division, since that is exactly what they desire to create against conservative people.

His 37-minute speech at the National Constitution Center in Philadelphia, March 18, has been hailed as “a speech for the ages.” It has been likened to John F. Kennedy’s speech in defense of separation of church and state when his candidacy was threatened by anti-Catholic bigotry.

Of course the communists don’t just want church and state seperation. Like in China and former Soviet Russia, they want the state to muzzle and starve the church to death, by taxes, property seizure and making religious belief illegal. Remember, these are the people who worship Marx and Engels.

With the media whipping up hysteria over the sermons of Obama’s former pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, the speech was seen as a challenge to save his campaign. It was heard live by millions on cable and network TV. Afterwards, commentators said the speech had turned danger into triumph, reaching once again across racial and partisan divides to build support for his presidential candidacy.

Of course Obama’s smooth rhetoric and after the fact denunciations of some of the things Dr. Wright said will smooth over everything for all the “typical white (liberal) people.” Consider me still far divided from the Communist’s own racist Messiah candidate.

Source: http://www.pww.org/article/articleview/12759/1/416/

Posted in Barack Obama, Christianity, communism, deception, Election, Election 2008, Hillary Clinton, International, intolerance, moveon.org, news, Obama, Presidential, Racism, Spirituality, Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment »

Exclusive! Communist Party calls Trinity United “Key Church”!

Posted by americana83 on March 26, 2008

Update 11/2/2009: Reverend Wright talks about “no nonsense Marxism” and couches it in Christian-speak. This is why the Communist Party, USA declares Trinity United Church of Christ a “key church” in the outreach to the African American community.

QUOTE: In his remarks, Wright bragged of his support of communists in Central America and the Libyan government. He further praised Monthly Review saying, “You dispel all the negative images we have been programmed to conjure up with just the mention of that word socialism or Marxism”-Source

The following exert is from the Communist Party, USA’s website. They consider Trinity United a “Key Church” I guess Dr. Wright’s constant denunciation of America, capitalism, and white people didn’t go unrewarded. It is particularly tragic to see America’s Christian community so diluted and distorted that Communists could come in by name and be accepted as partners. Remember, the party never compromises its principles: Atheism and socialism. They will use whatever means necessary to destroy America and its economic, religious, and social freedoms. The Communist Party joins the ever growing list of Anti-American groups (Nation of Islam, Hamas) who have been invited into or endorsed by Trinity United Church of Christ. The communists have also joined with the likes of the New Black Panthers(NBP) and Lois Farrakhan (Nation of Islam) to support Obama in his bid for presidency. While the Communists have not yet joined the NBP and Farrakhan in officially endorsing Obama, they defend and support him through their website. This is explored in my other post.

Commie Symbol

(From the CPUSA website)

Finally, I want to mention the tremendous protest movement that took place in many predominantly African American high schools against the injustice to the Jena 6. The National Rainbow PUSH coalition, churches and African American sororities and fraternities were also involved. We should do more to help build the movement around this case.

We hope this meeting will accelerate the process of building the fighting capacity of the party against racism and discrimination; of renewing, strengthening and expanding our relations with organizations and activists in the African American community. Whatever weaknesses we have cannot be solved out side of struggle. By stepping up our involvement and connection to struggles and movements already existing in the African American community, we will expand our relations with key activists and organizations – for example the National Rainbow PUSH, CBTU, some of the key churches like Trinity UCC, the Mt. Pilgrim Baptist Church, key community organizations like the South Austin Community Coalition, Kenwood Oaklawn Community Organization and others. We (The Communists!)have had working relations at various levels with many of these organizations over the years.

On the other hand, where coalitions get started around particular issues, it is essential for the party and YCL(Young Communist League) to play a role to guarantee that organizations of the African American community, and all core forces, are in the planning from the ground floor. I think we played a helpful role in getting the Oct. 27 coalition off on the right foot.
The Oct. 27 Midwest regional demonstration in Chicago offers a good opportunity for our clubs to renew or establish new relations with African American organizations and activists in our areas, to reach out and work together. This should be a conscious part of whatever plans are being made by the clubs. The rally is connecting the war with the funding crisis for education, health care, transit, etc. and provides a broad basis of unity.

Source CPUSA.org pulled 3/26/08:

Posted in Barack Obama, Bible, Christianity, communism, deception, Election, Election 2008, Hillary Clinton, International, intolerance, Jesus, news, Obama, Presidential, Racism, social spending, Spirituality | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments »

Communist Party USA supports Democratic Party, Defends Obama.

Posted by americana83 on March 26, 2008

The official website of the Communist Party USA(CPUSA), while not officially endorsing any candidate, seeks earnestly to defeat “reactionary” conservatives and place “progressive” democrats into offices, including the Oval Office.

Exerted from the Party’s website(Author: Joelle Fishman, Chair, Political Action Committee, CPUSA): (Red = CP-USA, Green = Obama, Black = my comments)

A few days later at a MoveOn house party calling voters in Texas, the woman sitting next to me smiled and said quietly, “I better listen for a while — I haven’t done this for 30 years.”

This first quote only serves to show that Communists support moveon.org, which I have contended is a communistic organization based on its views of America, freedom and traditional values. This only serves to strengthen that view.

Economists now agree that as long as the resources of the nation are squandered on the occupation of Iraq, it will not be possible to pursue an agenda of green job creation, health care for all, affordable housing or funding public education. The economy and the war are interlinked, and voters, including in swing states, are angry and aware.

These several agendas are almost verbatim from pulled from Obama’s speech. Unique to him is the creation of a massive “green job sector” From Obama’s Feb 13th speech: (See my article about this speech)

My energy plan will invest $150 billion over ten years to establish a green energy sector that will create up to 5 million new jobs over the next two decades – jobs that pay well and can’t be outsourced. We’ll also provide funding to help manufacturers convert to green technology

Republicans have chosen as their nominee one who envisions staying in Iraq for 100 years and who supports pre-emptive war regardless of the consequences. John McCain is in lockstep with U.S.-based global corporations who are out to dominate the world, destroy our constitutional rights, and drive down wages, benefits and economic security here at home.

Of course any “red” blooded communist would want to see companies, particularly American companies be heavily taxed and forced off the world market. Also ironic in this criticism is that Communist China’s cheap (and toxic) imports are driving out high paying jobs, benefits, economic security AND health. One only need look to the continuing flood of recalls of deadly lead filled toys and other items.

McCain represents a continuation of Bush or worse.

I would agree in a limited sense that McCain is worse than Bush, however not for the same reasons that the Communists do. McCain would continue the erosion of the Family and his “maverick” side would likely side with many “progressive” causes.

Hillary Clinton’s statement that only she and McCain are tested to take an emergency call at 3 a.m. is wrong and dangerous. It raises false doubts about Barack Obama and runs the risk of discouraging voter turnout or sending swing voters back to the Republicans in the general election.

A fear campaign cannot serve to change the course of the country. Hope, not fear, is the agent of progressive change. Racism, bigotry and anti-immigrant bashing also stand in the way of changing course.

The Communists discourage Hillary differentiating herself from Obama (indeed there really seems to be little substantial policy difference between the  two, with one key exception being Obama’s radical racial indoctrination). Though given the Communist Party’s historic use of racial, class, religious and other conflicts to further its agenda, Obama would in fact be as close to a dream candidate that the Communists could hope for (at this stage in history) from a mainstream American political party.

In a previous article, they hail Obama’s historic election.

The African American community, and especially trade unionists have played a crucial role in the struggle to defeat the ultra right. This includes massive voter turnout in election after election, but also the swing state mobilizations in 2004.

This was also reflected in the historic election of Barack Obama. Once again Obama’s campaign reflected the electoral voting unity of the African American community, but also the alliances built with several key trade unions, and forces in the Latino and white communities.
It also reflected a breakthrough among white voters. In the primary, Obama won 35% of the white vote and 7 north side wards, in a crowded field. During the general election he won every ward in the city and all the collar counties. This appeal has continued in his presidential run.

It is important to know that the Communist Party has a history of exploiting targets (such as minorities and unions). The power of collective bargaining(such as the right of a union to strike) is decapticated in a communist society, as it is unthinkable that the worker union would strike against the “workers’” party. Strikes are only used by communist as means to bring chaos and “change” in capitalist countries. The communists work in minority groups not to promote equality, but to create dissent and race struggle comparable to class struggle. Communists win by dividing and conquering. They need to promote struggle to give rise to a modern version of the Bolshevik revolution, which even according to “modern” communists must happen.

To advance to the immediate struggle for working people’s political power and the construction of socialism, the Party will seek to become the leading force or one of the leading forces among the working class and its core allies. The strategic opponent in this stage becomes the capitalist class as a whole and the system of capitalism. The alliance for socialism will have to embrace a large majority of the labor movement and the whole working class, who will have developed through their own experience of struggle, and through the activity of the Communist Party, clear class and socialist consciousness. The Party’s role will include agitation and propaganda for a fully developed socialist society on the way to communism. Source:CPUSA.org

This was pulled from the CPUSA website 3-26-2008. Communism still seeks to destroy private enterprise and the way of life that has helped bring prosperity to America. The CPUSA believes that Obama stands a greater chance than Hillary of uniting the country behind communist goals.The road to a”fully developed”socialist society always means violent revolution. In order to build a Communist America, the United States must first be utterly destroyed. This includes socially, economically, militarily and spiritually.

Obama’s racial “religious” views, his plans for enormous government spending, and radical views on abortion, marriage and other moral issues would play perfectly into the Communist’s plan to destroy America.

Change isn’t always good. Communism never is. Vote accordingly!

Posted in Barack Obama, communism, deception, Election, Election 2008, Hillary Clinton, International, moveon.org, news, Obama, Presidential, Racism, sexuality, social spending, Spirituality, Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 4 Comments »

New Pastor at Trinity United says Dr. Wright Crucified by Romans like Christ

Posted by americana83 on March 25, 2008

Though I would add, not innocent. The new Pastor of Trinity United spent his Easter sunrise sermon, not talking about Christ, his sacrifice and its meaning, but about Ex-Pastor Wright, his “unjust lynching” and setting up a “defense fund” for Trinity United.

Christ was without sin, and beyond reproach. His message of salvation was to the rich roman centurion as well as to the down and out. He lunched with tax collectors and healed paupers. Jesus did not pray to “damn” the Romans, but that God would have mercy on them “for they know not what they do” Christ and his apostles reached out to all people across all racial and socio-economic boundaries. His grace has the power to transform any life, to give “whosoever will believe” everlasting life.

Acts 17:24-26  God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands;  (25)  Neither is worshiped with men’s hands, as though he needed any thing, seeing he giveth to all life, and breath, and all things;  (26)  And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation;

John 3:14-17  And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up:  (15)  That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.  (16)  For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.  (17)  For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.

Acts 10:34-35  Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons:  (35)  But in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him.

 Galatians 3:26-28  For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.  (27)  For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.  (28)  There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

It takes some audacity to compare any man to Christ, especially someone living in a land where one has the freedom of speech/religion to rail against the government or any other person or body in the name of any deity or person they choose.

Christ preached the truth in love and boldness, without sedition or treason he presented a message uncompromised, for ALL people regardless of color. Dr. Wright and his former church may well have presented a portion of the truth, but dipped it in racism and railing against persons and spreading gossips and myths (e.g. America created AIDS to kill black people).

Dr. Wright or the legit questions and criticisms leveled at him and his ministry can in no way be compared to the unjust torture and execution of the sinless Son of God. Now THAT is audacity.

Posted in Barack Obama, Bible, Christianity, deception, Election 2008, Jesus, news, Obama, Racism, Spirituality | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

« Previous Entries
 
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 208 other followers