Posted on 11/02/2008 12:24:39 PM PST by HarvardHater
I’m white and I don’t go several times a month to listen to a “beloved” preacher who spits hatred, villification, spit and phlegm out his piehole against blacks or anyone else.
Christian, my white derriere.
Perhaps more concisely, I find it remarkable that in the entire history of Harvard, no prior president of the Harvard Law Review has ever left a a record of exactly NO published articles. Not even a footnote. No such president has ever NOT been invited to clerk for a Superior Court judge.
Are you suggesting that Ogletree, in these comments, is somehow playing the “race card,” to get an advantage in the election?
What I’ve seen other people suggest, including comments on FR, is that what’s going on here is that Ogletree and others who favor affirmative action and massive aid to poor blacks want to be able to say that the fact that Obama has been elected (if he is) doesn’t mean that white America is no longer racist — because Obama’s “not really black.”
In other words, if Obama’s elected, Ogletree’s worried that feelings of racial grievance by blacks will lessen, and feeling of white guilt will likewise lessen, and there will be less support for government aid to blacks. By defining Obama as “biracial,” Ogletree hopes to guard against the risks to his agenda posed by an Obama win.
Of course, ultimately the obsession with race of Ogletree and his fellow thinkers is quite destructive of the interests of all Americans, which is why I thought it was the approach of Obama NOT to make his candidacy as one about race — to try to get beyond race. Either that’s a sham, and Ogletree’s speaking in line with Obama’s real thinking, or Ogletree’s pursuing his own agenda in conflict with Obama’s. In other words, either Obama’s a fraud, or Ogletree’s disloyal. Personally I can’t figure out which.
SO WHAT!
A lot of people are bi-racial, a lot are tri-racial.
Big whoop-de-doo.
What difference does that make to the issues?
Fine, I’m voting against the White half.
1) Voting against a baby killing Marxist (when a disproportionate number of the babies are black) is not racism.
2) Race itself is a Darwinian concept, the biblical concept is of one humanity from Adam through Noah and diversity is a matter of nations, kindreds and tongues (formed at Babel) or ethnos (cultures).
3) The Christian gospel actually transcends race which is why it is found in every nation. From a Christian point of view, Jesus Christ has already solved the problem. The distinction is between believer and unbeliever which is a spiritual not natural distinction.
The statement is simply anti-christian hate speech of an intolerant bigot.
Since I am not familiar with this name, I did a Google search and discovered he has been disciplined for plagiarism. One of the 100 most influential Blacks in America - no wonder he’s for Obama. Both his skin color and his plagiarism fit perfectly with the Obama-Biden ticket.
Best summary I know of on Ogletree’s plagiarism (it links to many websites) is listed in my post, here:
http://harvardclownschool.blogspot.com/
Jeff at Protein Wisdom has some nice discussion of Ogletree’s comments, particularly regarding the forthcoming Ayers book on white supremacy:
http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=13579
It's gong to take a lot more than a lame assertion to break the conditioning I have been receiving for the last 40 years:
One drop of black blood makes one black.
That's been the liberal, PC mantra for so long I don't think anyone can make another left turn, intellectually.
Several other rational arguments come to mind, but I'll leave it at that.
Note: this topic is from 11/02/200. Thanks HarvardHater.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.