American blacks look to Obama as savior from enemy within

"I think he's it," ... "something ordained from above. He says he is going to bring about a change. Everyone knows it's time. It's the right time."

...and the Anti-Christ, who will "bring about change", is also "ordained from above" to carry out that portion of the Devine Plan.

“...he and the ‘Rat Congress, will leave the taxpayer with only change in their pockets.”

We’ll be lucky if we get that! Those commies will take all we make and give us back only what they think we need.....
“From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.” Never forget!!

Residents struggle with everything from broken glass on the sidewalks

If you are bothered by anything on the sidewalk, take the necessary safety measures, pick it up and dispose of it.

Ha, ha, ha! Yeah, right. Those are Broken Glass Democrats -- they would rather walk on it and bitch than to sweep it up themselves. I've met those kind that think a government entity should clean up their own neighborhoods.

“Thanks for your thoughtful response.

However, to make a point...would you quote Hitler? I mean, obviously you don’t accept ‘every phrase’ uttered by Hitler...but would you quote him, in trying to reach certain people? And if you did, who could we assume you were trying to reach?

I understand perfectly why you’re quoting him. You say you quote him because he’s the nearest ‘hero’ that crosses color lines, yet, history shows him not to be a hero at all, but a fraud, a Communist, a plagiarist. In the interest of truth, it seems to be it would be better to combat the lies perpetrated by the left, rather than attempt to co-opt him for your own uses, simply because he happens to be a convenient figure. I prefer the truth to propagandizing.

Obama says lots of things that ring with truth to American Blacks. Perhaps in 40 years people will be taking his quotes and trying to apply them to conservative issues, as if he were our ally. The movement is dead, long live the cause.”

-Response: What a great question! I love an intellectual argument. I think at the base of a decision to quote an individual as relevant to today's thinking one would have to assume that the audience one is appealing to would have to have a plurality of agreement as to the relevance of the individual being quoted. Speaking to Federalists, I'd say I would quote Hamilton. Speaking to the French, I'd say I would quote DeGaulle. Speaking to the Catholics, I'd say I would quote Aquinas. But speaking to the German people, I do not think I would quote Hitler for the simple fact that I do not believe a plurality of Germans today accept Hitler as either a ‘hero’ or as an authority whom the plurality respect and ‘own’ as their own.

As to Dr. King being shown by history to have been a fraud, I am not so sure about that. I look to John Kennedy and Thomas Jefferson in the same light as Dr. King. History has shown Kennedy to be a man who was an unfaithful husband, a bungler in his dealings with the CIA and a president who may well not have even been in the White House were it not for his father and LBJ and their vote tampering. Yet, there are things that Kennedy did and said that soared in terms of inspiration. Likewise, Jefferson had a black mistress and fathered several children by her. He worked in underhanded ways to undermine President Adams and other opponents. He spent himself into poverty and left his heirs in a terrible fix. Yet, he inspired us in other ways.

Both of these men were complex individuals. They were filled with both things we loved and things we hated. In a similar vein, I believe Dr. King was an imperfect individual who combined both things that inspired us with things that left us well, scratching our heads. In the end, I believe history presents us with the scales of positives and negatives and it is up to us in the time that we live to decide which way the scales tip. On each of these men, Kennedy, Jefferson and King...I still believe they brought us slightly more good, slightly more inspiration than their deficits can erase. With regards to Adolph Hitler, for me at least, this is not the case.

So, in the final analysis, I believe the truth is not black and white but shades of gray. Therefore, how you use your heroes is not necessarily propaganda but does need to be cemented in a ‘current’ context which I hope this further discussion provides.

To your point, in 40 years, there may be something of Barack Obama that is quoted. However, that will depend, in my opinion on whether he actually wins the presidency or continues to write. American history shows us that losers are not often quoted. Look at Wendel Wilkie or William Jennings Bryant...or 40 years ago, Hubert Humphrey and George Wallace...how much do we quote them? Richard Nixon and Lyndon Johnson, for better or worse, remain the most quoted American political figures of that era mostly because they won.

I guess, to prevent quotation of Obama by school children in 2050, one would have to work diligently to prevent his election today.