October 31st, 2006

I don’t even have anything to add.

Bananas are racist fruits.
Eating bananas is racist?
Finding racism everywhere

Ok, I do have something to add. This is what has become of us. A bunch of fools who have become so paranoid we are threatened by the ghost of a slain monster. The specter of racism seems to haunt the black community. We’re so ingrained with the idea that it’s out there looking for us that we can’t accept the fact that there aren’t many true racists out there. Sure, the organizations exist, and there are bigots and people who just think they’re better, but it’s not prevalent.

The worst part is that we’ve been so trained to see racism in one form from one group, that we miss it when it really happens. Examples:

George Allen’s mother is from Tunisia. Recently he used a North African racial slur and later claimed he made it up. Here’s the question: is it possible he really thought it was a made up word? He was born in California, with an American father. He may have heard his mother say it when he was very young and not known what it was. There are other allegations that he used other slurs in his youth, but they are somewhat unsubstantiated. But the “macaca” comment has sent him up in flames, along with the idea of the other suggested incidents..

By contrast, Robert Byrd is American through and through. And, as a former member of the KKK, he understands his domestic racial epithets. But no one’s mad at him. He opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1964…even filibustered for 14 hours. Of course, he’s off the hook for that because he voted for the ‘68 act. He opposed desegregation of the military, and in 2001…the first year of his current Senate term, he responded to a question about race relations by saying this on national television:

There are white niggers. I’ve seen a lot of white niggers in my time. I’m going to use that word. We just need to work together to make our country a better country, and I’d just as soon quit talking about it so much.

On national TV! Was there any outcry? Was there a 3-week news cycle on his history as a racist/segregationist? Was there a call for his resignation? Of course not! This is from March 7, 2001, three days after the interview:

Interestingly enough, a Nexis search of major newspapers retrieved just four stories about Byrd’s comment on Monday and zero Tuesday morning.Nexis unearthed no coverage of Byrd’s remarks in America’s so-called “paper of record,” the New York Times. Meanwhile, this story was page-two news in Monday’s New York Post.

Compare that with the 20 second-day articles that popped up in 1995 when Dick Armey referred to gay Democratic congressman Barney Frank as “Barney Fag.” (Armey later called it a slip of the tongue.) The Gray Lady did consider that news fit to print.

Byrd also called “a mistake” his long-ago membership in the Ku Klux Klan. How many Republicans could get away with discussing their previous involvement in the KKK while deliberately using the word “niggers” twice in one TV interview? Answer: zero.

This is the double-standard. Republicans get no second chances, while Democrats can do whatever they want as long as they apologize. The black community and refuses to realize that the Democrats aren’t for us, they’re for themselves. So they’ll use us to get elected, then say whatever they want, knowing that we’re too deeply invested to get out, regardless of what they do. The Republican party is no better, but that’s the point. We need to take off our blinders and see what’s really out there.

October 28th, 2006

I’m so tired of people playing the race card every dang day. It’s like there are people paid to sit in an office and find any thing that they could imply racist intent to and get a press release out immediately. Recently I heard about an ad run against Michael Dukakis in ‘88 about a man named Willie Horton. Apparently it was considered by some to be racist. Check it out for yourself.

YouTube Preview Image

I don’t know about you, I just don’t see it. Sure, you could stretch this to say that it’s saying “black people are bad, and Dukakis likes them.” Or, you could see it for what it is…a statement of fact. Horton was serving a life-sentence w/o parole for 1st degree murder. But he got to leave for the weekend.

Now we have the Harold Ford ad, which is considered racist because it shows a white woman who is interested in this African-American man. First of all, she was supposed to be one of the girls from a playboy party. If you think of a stereotypical playboy bunny, you have to envision a white, blonde woman. That’s a given. So why not use one in your ad, as a stereotype? See this one for yourself.

YouTube Preview Image

I don’t know about you, but I don’t see any racist sentiment there. And, as a black man who is married to a white woman, I have dealt with the issue of race in this context more than most will even see through a friend. You don’t have to tell me that the sentiment still exists. But I don’t see any racism here. I see a ridiculously outlandish and corny commercial that is destined to affect no one (the only part I like is the face the guy makes after he talks about the porn producer thing). It probably speaks the truth about the guy, but I can’t say for sure. But the DNCC and the NAACP are 1)afraid it might be effective, and 2)willing to take any opportunity to discredit the opponents statements.

I have a question…why can’t these networks and newspapers, and bloggers seem to find any black people who don’t think these ads were racist? Am I the only one? I couldn’t possibly be. But you know what, it wouldn’t even matter. Because as soon as one of us speaks up, we’ll be called Uncle Tom, or “token”, or people will say we want to be white, or something like that. Basically we aren’t black enough to speak as black people. We wouldn’t be counted in the Black Census.

Well, I’m sick of it. Black people need to stand up and take the reigns of their own lives. Instead of playing the race card, a la Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Cynthia McKinney, and the like, we need to do something with our lives. We need to stop idolizing rappers and basketball players and start looking up to entrepreneurs, doctors, lawyers, scientists, philosophers, and statesmen. We need to stop looking for handouts and start earning our rewards. Don’t blame white people for our problems, just fix them.

People say that blacks are born into poverty and are doomed by the system to stay there because they can’t get an education and get held down by society. But immigrants keep coming here from Europe, Asia, and India, starting out with pennies to their name and in the second or third generation are successful doctors. Sure, the Europeans might “have it easier” because they’re white, but what about the Pakistanis and the Cambodians? It can be done, so let’s do it.

October 27th, 2006

There are two things I’m getting tired of from the Christian left in this country. No, they are not abortion and gay marriage. But the first is that every time a blogger or columnist editorializes their statements about conservative Christians, they whittle the position down to abortion and gay marriage. They’re going for the “if I hear it enough, it must be true” response from their readers. If they tell everyone that the only thing that matters to a conservative Christian is abortion and gay marriage, no one else will see that we care about other things.

Here’s how the conversation might go…

Connie: I think that school vouchers is a great idea. If we can work out a way to bus the low-income kids to the better schools of their choice, then that would start to eliminate the education gap in this country.

Libby: No, you can’t do that, because only the rich kids would be able to go to the good schools, and the poor schools would get worse.

Connie: That’s what the bus system would be for…the poor kids.

Libby: But buses put undue strain on kids and their families, the poor kids will suffer.

C: They already suffer. The education will help them escape that suffering.

L: You don’t care about poor people’s well-being, you just want this because it’ll allow you to vote for someone who’s against abortion and gay marriage.

C: That’s not true.

L: It is! That’s all you conservative Christians care about. You always bring it up!

C: Uhhh…you brought it up.

L: Whatever. If you could get past that, we might actually accomplish some things.

And on and on it goes. Of course, they never mention the fact that they could be the ones to ignore it. Because what happens is, liberals push for it, conservatives object, then the liberals say we’re holding up real progress because of things that don’t matter. Well, if they don’t matter, stop pushing for them!!!!! If you stop pushing, we can stop pushing back. But people won’t abandon their principles on either side. Perhaps if the left pushed a social/humanitarian agenda that didn’t include abortion or same-sex marriage, the right would jump on board. I would. I’m all for helping poor people. But if you say we can’t have the coffee without the cream, then I’ll have tea.

The other thing that I’m fed up with is this idea that the Religious Right has hijacked the faith for a political end, but the left hasn’t. A quote from Jim Wallis:

Greg shared his cynicism about politics in general and his dislike of how some on the Religious Right have made politics a divisive issue in churches. He recently wrote an op-ed piece in the Minneapolis StarTribune titled “My church has been hijacked by politics.” But he doesn’t want to see the same thing on the Left either, and I agreed.

That’s preposterous. The left has been hijacked, just as the right has. I’ve sat in a lot of conservative church services–revivals, youth rallies, Sunday morning, evening, Bible studies, different denominations–I have never heard a political sermon. Not once. I know it happens in various places, but I’ve never been present. But 6 months after I started working at a liberal church, I had heard more politics from the altar than I thought I would in my life. When I see reverends out pushing a political agenda, I don’t just see Falwell and Robertson and Dobson, I also see Jackson, and Sharpton, and Hanson. The Episcopal Church is facing major issues because the left-wing of their church is pushing a new agenda that the right wants no part of.

And let’s not forget that little tidbit. The agenda of the left is the new thing. If you’re not satisfied with the way things are, you’re welcomed to call for change, but don’t get mad at those who are satisfied when they object. The left continues to suggest that the right is pushing an agenda, but the right is mostly standing firm in the existing one, while the left pushes new stuff(the aforementioned school vouchers program excluded).

I wish all these people (like Wallis) who claim to want to separate the church from politics would actually do it. You’re a reverend for crying out loud. Stop doing political blogs and speeches and forums and what not where all you do is blast the Christians on the other side of the aisle because they don’t agree with you and start preaching the Gospel of Christ.

Don’t just preach it for the poor, but for the rich as well…and not just for the liberal, but the conservative also. Wallis was wrong to say “that any gospel that wasn’t good news to the poor simply wasn’t the gospel of Jesus Christ.” The truth is that any gospel that isn’t good news to all people is not the Gospel of Jesus Christ.”

October 26th, 2006

I just did a Google search for “limbaugh michael fox”, because I wanted to see how the situation was being reported in the media. It’s pretty unfair. Not one article (synopsis, at least) takes seriously Rush’s criticism. They all say he “attacked” Fox and basically say he was criticizing his personal character. But Fox has admitted that he doesn’t take his meds sometimes when he’s making an appearance.

That’s not even the problem. It’s understandable that he would do that, because everyone should be aware how bad the tremors can get, because that’s what the disease is. The pills help, but not everyone has access all the time. But the real problem is something else.

Fox says that Jim Talent, Michael Steele, and a couple of other Republican politicians oppose stem cell research, and want to make it illegal. But that’s not even true. Stem Cell research is legal in all of the states his ad is showing in. In fact, the only person involved who has voted against it is Ben Cardin, a Dem that Fox runs an ad for. But, at least in Mizzou, this is about a constitutional amendment, that will do all sorts of stuff, other than secure stem cell research.

For example: it outlaws human cloning, if you plan to put the fertilized egg inside a woman. But if you plan to incubate it in a lab, you can grow all the babies you want (that’s a paraphrase). It also allows for “reimbursement” to women who donate eggs to research. It say they can’t be paid for them, but they can apparently be paid back for them. Finally, it says that stem cell researchers have to follow all current scientific laws and ethical standards, unless they impede or discourage stem cell research. I don’t know about you, but that sounds to me like they can do whatever they want in the name of stem cell research.

Luckily Rush doesn’t have to do all the talking. Jim Caviezel, Kurt Warner, Patricia Heaton and some other celebrities have put together their own ad about Amendment 2. They don’t involve the names of candidates, like Fox’s ad does (supporting Claire McCaskill), they just give the facts about the amendment. Unfortunately, their ad won’t get the national attention that it deserves, and it will be characterized as a response to Fox’s ad, though it isn’t.

And is it fair that everyone is running to Fox’s defense? Is he really incapable of responding himself? Well, he certainly makes enough capaign appearances and pithy jokes to be considered a big boy. All Rush did was pose some questions. Diane Sawyer asked Sean Hannity, “If you have Parkinson’s disease, and you believe embryonic stem cell research is the, is the answer, a possible answer, a possible cure, don’t you have a right to speak up?”

Hannity responds: “You have a right to speak up, but he also has a right to be criticized. He’s a guy that is very political…He’s supporting a guy in Maryland, Ben Cardin and Ben Cardin voted the opposite way of which he wanted. Why isn’t he running ads against the Democrat?”

Well said. I finally found an article that considers the other side…here it is.

It also hits on this ad against Harold Ford, Jr. in Tennessee that liberal are saying is racist because it dramatizes a white woman who is attracted to Ford, a black man. Apparently this is supposed to rile up the country white-folk and make them hate this black guy because a white woman is attracted to him. I’ve seen it all over the place. But, as Hannity says, Steel, along with black Republican gubernatorial candidate Lynn Swan (go Steelers!), have been called “token” by Democrats repeatedly. That’s just this year. In the past the term has been given to Colin Powell and Condeleeza Rice…pretty much any black Republican. I guess “conservative” is now synonymous with “racist”. Somebody should do a Wikipedia update. Why can’t black people be real Republicans? Why must we assume they’re all Manchurian candidates? We don’t all live on welfare and government housing, you know.

Until I hear a major news outlet other than Fox add outrage at the term “token” being assigned to black Republicans to their news cycle, I’ll probably never even respect their political commentary. One story won’t cut it. it will have to get big attention for 3 or 4 days and have some investigative reporting and “hard-hitting” questions at the Democrats who said it.

October 19th, 2006

Which are busier? I’m not sure. I’ve been one of them these last 10 or 12 days. I’m trying to set up a major event for a few months from now (which means a website and promo materials which I can’t afford to contract out), keep up with the work of the ministry, while coaching a small high school basketball team. It’s been great fun, but I’m tired and I haven’t been able to write five words in the last week.

I’ve been listening to a lot of sermon podcasts lately. My favorite is still Matt Chandler, but I recently picked up Mark Driscoll’s and Rob Bell’s podcasts, and have been very impressed. I guess I should have seen it coming, considering the number of people they’ve each brought near to Christ, but it still amazes me. I’m moved by these men’s words every day.

If you’ve read any of my posts, you know that I’m pretty conservative theologically. I believe it’s the responsibility of a Christian to find out what the Bible’s writers were trying to say at the time. When you’re reading a history, see it as a history; when you’re reading a parable, see it as one; when you’re reading an apocalypse, know that it’s metaphor. And when the writers meant what they said literally, accept it literally. Dig in to find the whole meaning, but know that it’s meant to be literal.

I’ve heard plenty of derogatory terms for Christians from the outside, but I heard(or read, rather) the first one from the inside a few days ago: bibliolators. The writer believes that people who hold any person’s belief, revelation, or prophecy (not the future-telling kind) up to Scripture to see if it’s right, and “put the Bible on a pedastal” so-to-speak, are idolators. It made me sad. How could you be a Christian and go against the book that tells you of your Lord? How could you fault, even insult, people who won’t? Jesus’ every teaching was from Scripture. He used it constantly. He taught rabbis and dressed-down the religious elites using Scripture. And that was God. What makes you think that we could do better without it?

“For the wisdom of this world is foolishness in God’s sight.”
1 Corinthians 3:19

Next Page »

Charles Jones's Facebook profile