Something that keeps bugging me about Obama is his smoothness mixed with his dire view of America. I just don’t understand how a practicing Christian, successful-beyond-belief black man in America can see the world as he does. And I certainly can’t comprehend sitting in a church for 20 years, donating thousands of dollars, yet not really knowing the doctrine OR your pastor/friend/teacher/adviser—I just don’t buy it….something does not compute!
I’ve compiled some excerpts from couple of articles today from Thomas Sowell and Paul Edwards at Townhall.com. The themes of these two pieces kind of lead to a scenario of “Obama the Con Man”. Before I’m done, you’ll probably think I have tinfoil on my head…..but I think the questions and points I’ve made bear a review, at the very least.
First….Thomas Sowell hits another home run with me….here’s some great excerpts just below:
There was no way that he didn’t know about Jeremiah Wright’s anti-American and racist diatribes from the pulpit.
Someone once said that a con man’s job is not to convince skeptics but to enable people to continue to believe what they already want to believe.
Accordingly, Obama’s Philadelphia speech — a theatrical masterpiece — will probably reassure most Democrats and some other Obama supporters. They will undoubtedly say that we should now “move on,” even though many Democrats have still not yet moved on from George W. Bush’s 2000 election victory.
Like the Soviet show trials during their 1930s purges, Obama’s speech was not supposed to convince critics but to reassure supporters and fellow-travelers, in order to keep the “useful idiots” useful.
Best-selling author Shelby Steele’s recent book on Barack Obama (“A Bound Man”) has valuable insights into both the man and the circumstances facing many other blacks — especially those who were never part of the black ghetto culture but who feel a need to identify with it for either personal, political or financial reasons.
Like religious converts who become more Catholic than the Pope, such people often become blacker-than-thou. For whatever reason, Barack Obama chose a black extremist church decades ago — even though there was no shortage of very different churches, both black and white — in Chicago.
This is one thing that occurred to me yesterday….Why, if Obama, as a mixed-race man and “uniter”, did he happen to choose Trinity United Church of Christ with all of its radical, racist warts? Why did he not choose one of the white churches, since he is part white? Why not choose a non-radical black church?
These are the types of questions in my mind that seem to have an answer something like this: Because he didn’t go for the “Christianity”, he didn’t go to unite anyone….he went because he needed those extreme views. Why? As Thomas Sowell points out, we may never know (see below). But I can suspect many things—he needed to be a part of those views for political purposes? or for some sort of “standing” in that community? to distance himself from Islam (for his future political career)? or, most likely, because he agrees with the churches teachings or learned to agree with the teachings (remember, Obama was in his 20’s when he started there and has said Jeremiah Wright led him!)?
Sowell goes on:
Some say that he was trying to earn credibility on the ghetto streets, to facilitate his work as a community activist or for his political career. We may never know why.
………Shelby Steele depicts Barack Obama as a man without real convictions, “an iconic figure who neglected to become himself.”
Senator Obama has been at his best as an icon, able with his command of words to meet other people’s psychic needs, including a need to dispel white guilt by supporting his candidacy.
But President of the United States, in a time of national danger, under a looming threat of nuclear terrorism? No.
Nail on the head! That was another way of saying….Obama is a talented, smooth-talker, but darnit, where is the substance? Obama falls dangerously short on how he will accomplish this “unity”, everlasting “hope”, and radical “change” that he so eloquently communicates!
And speaking of Obama’s rhetoric, Paul Edwards at Townhall.com has one of the best pieces I’ve read all day: Senator Obama, It’s About Far More Than Rhetoric
The underlying theme of the piece about midway through it:
The media, both conservative and mainstream, is focused on the incendiary rhetoric of Jeremiah Wright while totally ignoring the political/religious philosophy fueling the words. ……….The more important question we should be asking the Senator is, Do you repudiate the philosophy of Black Liberation Theology espoused by your church?
As I’ve written about ad nauseam, the Reverend Wright follows the Black Liberation Theology, which is the basis of the Trinity United Church of Christ doctrine. Edwards describes this as a “dangerous political theology” and he goes on:
Rev. Wright’s worldview is a poisonous mixture of Marxist socialism and a distorted view of the gospel of Jesus Christ which has as its chief goal the obliteration of Anglo/European influence on American life, culture and politics.
Edwards also some quotes from the founder of the Black Liberation Theology, James Cone:
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.
This was the part that got my attention…..the first thing that crossed my mind was…Oh, my Gosh, that same principle aligns with some of Islam’s approach to its religion….
Islam: Jesus Christ relegated to prophet
Black Liberation Theology: “task of black theology is to kill Gods who do not belong to the black community“
Islam: They believe the Bible has been corrupted
Black Liberation Theology: In Edwards’ words –“a distorted view of the gospel of Jesus Christ which has as its chief goal the obliteration of Anglo/European influence on American life, culture and politics”
Islam: Surah 9:5 — “Fight and slay the Pagans wherever you find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem [of war].”
Black Liberation Theology: destruction of the white enemy; destroy our oppressors.
Maybe I am reading too much into it, but honestly that was my first thought. It doesn’t seem that far a stretch to me that with Obama’s training in the Koran as a young kid, he might have seen a similar world view at this church …. After all, Obama’s pastor travelled with and honored Louis Farrakhan, described as the “Honorable Minister” at the Nation of Islam. And the Nation of Islam’s Muslim Program has similarities to the Black Liberation Theology. It’s a theory.
(UPDATE 3/20/08: As I read this last part again, I sort of intertwined the Nation of Islam and Islam. They are somewhat different….but the main point is that the views espoused by Cone, who started Black Liberation Theology, have some similarities to Islam, as noted above. In addition, the Minister and Obama, it seems to me have ties to the Nation of Islam which has its roots in Islam and the Koran, but with a touch of the same tenants as Black Liberation Theology….just wanted to clarify the intertwining of the three views.)
Further, I still have my doubts regarding Barack Obama’s truthfulness about his Muslim experience. Let’s face it, since we don’t know a whole lot about the man….doesn’t it seem there could be more there than meets the eye or what he’s telling? And if so, and he becomes President, what then?
Think about that as you read this passage I found on a summary of Islam :
“Philosopher Ibn Taymiyah (1263-1328) wrote a book titled The Sword on the Neck of the Accuser of Muhammad. In it he described how Muslims should live when they are in the minority. ‘Believers when in a weakened stage in a non-Muslim country should forgive and be patient with People of the Book [Jews and Christians] when they insult Allah and his prophet by any means. Believers should lie to People of the Book to protect their lives and religion.’ … There’s an Islamic proverb that says, ‘If you can’t cut your enemies’ hand, kiss it.’ When Mohammed was weak in Mecca, he was a lamb. When he was strong in Medina, he was a lion. Muslims living in predominantly Muslim countries do not hesitate to oppress and persecute Christians and Jews. On the other hand, Muslims living in Christian nations or nations where the majority profess to be Christians are very good at presenting themselves as loving, caring and forgiving people” (Gurganus, Peril of Islam, p. 107).
Considering the Nation of Islam’s connection to Islam, and Rev Wright’s relationship with Farrakhan (Nation of Islam), I refer you to a column by Debbie Schlussel, from January, regarding Nation of Islam staffers in Obama’s campaign. She brings up a chilling thought:
How many Nation of Islam members will work in an Obama White House?
I report, you decide.
Filed under: 2008 Presidential election, Barack HUSSEIN Obama, Morality/Character, Muslim Watch, Politics, Socialism | Tagged: Barack Obama, Black Liberation Theology, James Cone, Jeremiah Wright, Louis Farrakhan, Nation of Islam, Obama, Politics |