by LauraLoo
President Obama is urging African-Americans to pressure churches to advance his election and support his administration. He is calling on voters to become “congregation captains.”
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BdjoHA5ocwU[/youtube]
Email LauraLoo with your Lunch Break suggestions.
[HT: Susie Allen]
Violations will be deleted and you may be banned.
Threats will be immediately reported to authorities.
Following these rules will make everyone's experience visiting JillStanek.com better.
Our volunteer moderators make prudent judgment calls to provide an open forum to discuss these issues. They reserve the right to remove any comment for any reason. Jill's decisions on such moderations are final.
Go to gravatar.com to create your avatar.
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
“even gave up their lives” “where everyone gets a shot”
We desperately need to vote this boy-man out.
Aw, Maggie Sanger would be so proud…
I cannot see anything in this video that would offend anyone in anyway. I tried to view it through your eyes, and still, nothing.
LOL
“Everybody plays by the same rules.”
Right. So he continues subsidies for some specific industries, choosing winners and losers. And within those industries, for only some specific companies. Crony corporatism, Chicago style on the Potomac. Awesome!
Among cynical pols, O’s one of the exemplars.
No worries, tribal loyalty will ensure electoral recidivism among the rubes. Never mind the facts, fact-based community. Just punch the party chad. ;-)
We desperately need to vote this boy-man out.
Sounds like Limbaugh-style race-baiting to me, just as it probably does to millions of other Americans as I’m by no means unique.
By all means, carry on. Don’t retreat, re-load. Double down.
http://goo.gl/1214S
Just sayin’. ;-)
Hal 1:06PM
How about the seperation of church and state? And where are the seperation of church and state police when Democrats go soliciting to churches for votes?
mp 1:48PM
Get real. What is race baiting about it? To suggest someone is a boy-man is to suggest they are in over their heads. They need to grow up.
Why is it OK to say this about a white man but not a black man?
*Gack*
Hal,
That’s it. He basically said nothing. Hope…..Determination…. Change. Nothing new on his agenda. (See election 2008.)
Now, why is he only addressing blacks in this video? Does he think white people are not useful to his re-election? Has he forgotten the whites who voted for him?
Why is it OK to say this about a white man but not a black man?
It’s not OK. Referring to a man as a “boy,” regardless of race, is demeaning except under very special circumstances. For a white person to refer to a black man as a “boy” is racist.
If you’re white and don’t think it is racist, try visiting a predominantly black neighborhood and addressing a black man passing by as “boy” and see how that works for you.
http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/201203090012
If GWB did this, the left would have a cow.
We’re definitely not going to see any alarmist press releases from the ACLU hyperventilating about the mixing of religion and government in this case. Ugh, the double standards are so blatant. The question is, will conservatives ever learn how to win the messaging game? Or will they just “take the high road,” as is typical, and blow this off?
Just imagine for a moment what 100 savvy Breitbart-like media geniuses could do if they would STICK it to the left in coordinated fashion. I marvel at how left-wingers manage to frame the debate that plays out in our mass media so often; they’ve got it down to a science. Seriously, the buzzwords and phrasing of certain topics, the life issue especially, are said in a masterfully synchronized chorus on every mainstream news channel. No doubt publicists are writing talking points and feeding them to every lefty producer.
Some on the pro-life media seem to understand this but I think every conservative in the information biz needs to learn a new approach. CREATIVE extremism, folks.
Time to harangue the Left until they cry uncle.
-tall tenor
Hmm. It might be a superficially racist act, but such beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Someone who often uses the term “boy” in a generic sense might simply fail to be self-aware enough to avoid using it in the case of a black person. This would not be racist, but someone calling him a racist might be obtuse.
At any rate, I don’t care. IMO, when self-righteous prigs quick to impugn others start judging them on the content of their character instead of the color of their interlocutors’ skin, I’ll take interest.
Racial sensitivity, yes. Paranoia about race-baiting jackasses? No.
With the election of Obama, though, we’ve seen a new thing. Any criticism of him has been viewed (by some) as racist. So now we can’t even call someone’s policies idiotic if he happens to be a minority. And I was going to say “not if we’re white, anyway,” but even black conservatives have been called Uncle Toms by whites for having the temerity to disagree with a black man.
Good grief.
Black folk, don’t venture off that progressive plantation or they’ll send the patter-roller’s atter ye.
With the election of Obama, though, we’ve seen a new thing. Any criticism of him has been viewed (by some) as racist. So now we can’t even call someone’s policies idiotic if he happens to be a minority.
Feel free to call his policies idiotic. I do.
Just don’t say they’re the policies of an idiotic “boy.”
“Idiotic man” works fine for me.
:)
I love how you folks just can’t deal with the FACT that there are pro-choice communities of faith. Rather than accept that there is no “one, true church,” you denigrate all those religions that you view as apostate. If anybody is looking for a modern day example of the narrow mind-set of the Papal Inquisition, they need only look at the postings on this blog which exemplify Christian (mostly Catholic) dogmaticism at its finest.
Wait, CC, no one said they don’t like pro-choice communities of faith. NICE TRY at playing the religion card.
CC: “
mp 6:06PM
Sometimes when the shoe fits you wear it, whatever color you are. When someone is not behaving like an adult, like whining incessently about the problems left by a previous president, you refer to them as a boy/man. If its demeaning, too bad. Grow up.
Start by realizing that every president inherits a mess, put on your big boy pants, and go from there.
Argh.
Well, CC, take that last post of mine to be a sufficient answer. You’re not a tough interlocutor, really. ;-)
Speaking of racist, what if a white president or presidential candidate put out a call specifically to white Americans to pressure their houses of worship, be they Jewish, Christian, Muslim, Hindu, or whatever on his/her behalf?
For starters, the left would go berserk and the seperation of church and state police would be howling like banshees.
Speaking of racist, what if a white president or presidential candidate put out a call specifically to white Americans to pressure their houses of worship, be they Jewish, Christian, Muslim, Hindu, or whatever on his/her behalf?
Bush did it. That’s how he became president.
Holy cow people, in other events and videos he will address other groups. And, yes, at times, he will address all of us together. Politicians do this all the time, whether it is a Hispanic group, Italian Americans, or AIPAC.
And Mary, if a “white president” did this, it would not be racist.
mp 7:03PM
Specifics please, like direct quotes of Bush specifying white Americans.
Hal, what if a white President started a website entitled, “CaucasianAmericans.BillClinton.com”? You wouldn’t think that was even slightly racist?
Y’know, the term “boy,” used in a racially charged way, as far as I know always depended on and exploited the genuine asymmetry between the speaker and the one spoken to/about. “Ah say, boy, brang that bucket o’ whitewash over hyar — ye missed a spot. Step quick, boy!”
I’d be interested in knowing what asymmetry of power exists between the average citizen tossing speech around carelessly, and the President of the United States.
It’s just weird to imply that use of the word “boy” concerning anyone at all who happens to hold the most powerful office in the world is somehow an emphasis on the racially asymmetrical power of the speaker over the one spoken of.
For my part, if I were speak of Obama as “boy” it’d be more likely — given how I use the term “boy” when at all — that I’d do so in some good-ol’-boy joking sense, as with a friend. Not, that is, while excoriating him for being a Bad Thing for America, or whatever.
But Hal, When he addresses all of us, he’s usually castigating. It ain’t the same.
Janet: Actually, he’s usually concocting straw men out of whole cloth.
“There are some who say…”
;-)
Hal 7:13PM
Yes politicians will certainly pander to specific groups, but for a president to specify a particular religious, ethnic, or racial group? That they pressure their house of worship? Not appropriate Hal, sorry. You know as well as I that no white president or candidate would get away with it either.
What if Mitt Romney made a video calling specifically on all white Americans to pressure their houses of worship on his behalf, as Obama called on only African-Americans, to pressure their houses of worship on his behalf?
I would say this would be every bit as inappropriate and the seperation of church and state police would go ballistic.
Specifics please, like direct quotes of Bush specifying white Americans.
Mary, Bush went after the Christian right, which is predominantly white, so they didn’t have to specify white Americans.
mp,
So you can’t give me specific quotes. I didn’t think so. Also predominantly white isn’t all white.
It’s not OK. Referring to a man as a “boy,” regardless of race, is demeaning except under very special circumstances.
I use the term boy-man when I refer to proabort males over the age of 18. Is that a special enough circumstance for you?
I use it to talk about my children’s biological dad who’s pushing 50, acts like he’s 14, is Caucasian and tried to get me to abort our child.
I think it’s sexist to refer to Obama’s race as black. After all the person who didn’t abort him and raised him is white.
I will continue to refer to Obama as a boy-man as long as he continues to enable irresponsibility in our young men by promoting abortion. If you think that makes me a racist, you need to grow up a bit yourself.
Hi Rasqual,
Slightly off topic and going back to a previous discussion, did you ever watch Band of Brothers? Naturally I have a very strong affinity for that show and the characters. I also enjoyed Commanders at War, the Battle of the Bulge.
Commanders at War have various famous battles from the perspectives of the commanding officers of each side. I think you would enjoy that.
I also think I’ve seen about every movie and documentary on the Siege of Bastogne.
So you can’t give me specific quotes. I didn’t think so. Also predominantly white isn’t all white.
Mary, that’s fine, but your ideology is dominating both your thinking and your view of the world.
I will continue to refer to Obama as a boy-man as long as he continues to enable irresponsibility in our young men by promoting abortion. If you think that makes me a racist, you need to grow up a bit yourself.
meh.
It’s important to chant the Limbaugh mantra.
Have a good evening.
mp 9:41PM
Whatever the ideology, facts are what they are. You gave me no direct quotes.
Whatever the ideology, facts are what they are. You gave me no direct quotes.
Mary, I pointed out that the Bush people went after the Christian right.
Do you disagree?
The Christian right is predominantly white, so they had selected for white voters–intentionally or not–simply by targeting the Christian right.
You want me to give you quotes indicating they targeted the Christian right, or quotes indicating they targeted whites?
There are no quotes that I’m aware of indicating they specifically talked about whites; they didn’t have to talk about it, but you know that.
It was a refinement of the Nixon Southern Strategy. There are all kinds of media references on the internet about it.
You could look it up, but you won’t, so why should I do it for you?
It’s important to chant the Limbaugh mantra.
I’ve never watched or listened to Limbaugh, including the clip on this site so meh — back atcha.
mp 10:10PM
I want quotes where Bush specifically said white Americans. You admit you can give me none.
What exactly was the Nixon Southern Strategy? You brought it up so tell me what it was.
What exactly was the Nixon Southern Strategy? You brought it up so tell me what it was.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy
The majority in both parties is white, as far as I can tell.
Anyway: “did you ever watch Band of Brothers?”
Yeah. Loved it.
Thanks for the other recommendations too.
mm, interesting,
So, the Republicans, who supported civil and voting rights when Democrats filibustered both the civil and voting rights acts of 1964 and 1965 respectively, the bills never would have passed without Republican help, now decided to exploit racism. And the racists and bigots, who opposed civil and voting rights, went over to the Republicans who supported both these bills and helped pass them.
Now, considering the most notorious of segregationists were Democrat, i.e. George”segregation forever” Wallace and “Bull” Connor, notorious for turning police dogs and fire hoses on black civil rights demonstrators, and that Jim Crow laws were instituted by Democrats, this does seem odd indeed.
Read further and you find that economists argue that support of Republicans had more to do more with economics than race. In “The End of Southern Exceptionalism” political scientists Richard Johnston and Byron Schafer argue Republican gains had more to do with the rise of the upper middle class in that region. According to these authors, white voters voted their economic preferences, not their racial ones. Until the the early 1990’s, working class whites continued to vote Democrat.
Well Mary, I guess that explains all the “white guilt” we see among liberal Democrats.
:-D
Well Mary, I guess that explains all the “white guilt” we see among liberal Democrats.
It doesn’t explain everything, but it certainly explains some of it.
Meanwhile, conservatism is imploding again, just as it did in 1964.
Rasqual, you seem a very intelligent person, and I don’t have a problem with your “pro-life” position, but find it difficult to understand how you believe that the folks here are “conservatives.”
Rasqual, please ignore my question.
Thank you.
I don’t think conservatism is imploding at all; I think the Republican party is experiencing a deficit of imagination in respect of a very popular conservatism that’s made common cause with much libertarian thought in recent years.
It’s amazing how many pro-choice libertarians are remaining relatively silent about abortion of late, because they’ve noted how many social conservatives share their libertarian concerns about statism run amok in the U.S. It’s an uneasy truce, to be sure, but the popularity of Ron Paul — and his crossover popularity among many liberals with libertarian leanings against nanny statism (not to mention anti-war libs)…
It’s an exciting time to be alive. Anything could happen. For adventurous sorts like me — who are as ready to die as to live (and that’s because of a healthy theology, not a morose outlook) — that’s just good stuff through and through.
The future? Bring it on.
Thanks for your response.
I would never call our president a boy-man. That’s insulting.
He’s clearly a man-child.
Why are there no liberals on this board screaming about the separation of church and state?
So let me see if I have the narrative correct… When Catholic institutions defend themselves from a government that intends to force them to violate their beliefs, that represents a violation of the separation of church and state – by the Catholic institutions, but not the government!
Yet when the president himself asks people to campaign for him inside churches, that has absolutely nothing to do with the separation of church and state.
Is there ANYTHING that Obama could do that would be considered a violation of the separation of church and state? And conversely, is there ANYTHING Catholic institutions can do other than roll over and/or shut down forever that would NOT be considered a violation of said separation? Is there somewhere that liberals go to learn how they’re supposed to bend reality on the issues of the day? (other than WhiteHouse.gov?)
Hans, I seriously never considered race when I referred to Obama as a boy-man but I’ve thought about it and agree with you. From now on, Obama is a man-child to me but other proabort adult Caucasian males will remain boy-men to me. Please correct me in the future; I’m bound to slip-up.
Does this compromise work for you, mp?
John: Any stick will do when religious authorities need to be put in their place (which we all know is at secularism’s heel)! And Obama’s place is astride the rainbow-vaulting unicorn, so hey.
Does this compromise work for you, mp?
The purpose of this hysterical rhetoric is what, exactly?
How does it bring about a national discussion?
I mean, aside from entertaining those who already agree with you.
Massively against this – would leave any church that starts endorsing candidates.
Massively against this – would leave any church that starts endorsing candidates.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=72K2iViWEis
The purpose of this hysterical rhetoric is what, exactly?
To show that not everything you think is racist, is actually racist.
Simmer.
To show that not everything you think is racist, is actually racist.
Well, how about Limbaugh’s comment today that Obama “… looks at the Constitution as rich white man’s law.”
I call those the words of a race-baiter. What do you call them? The truth?
Limbaugh being Limbaugh?
President Obama is urging African-Americans to pressure churches to advance his election and support his administration. He is calling on voters to become “congregation captains.”
You folks seem to have forgotten about Christian Coalition.
How convenient.
I think MP is suffering from white guilt, it makes her feel better about herself to look for racism in everything and anything. This eases her guilt…
I think MP is suffering from white guilt, it makes her feel better about herself to look for racism in everything and anything. This eases her guilt…
That’s right, Jasper, do a drive-by and try to re-direct the discussion to something CONVENIENT, like smearing me.
Well, it’s been over 1 hour and no Jasper.
For you folks who are uninitiated in the ways of the Internet, this is what a “drive-by shooting” looks like.
Slime a commenter, then depart.
“Jasper” will forever be known to me as “Mr. Drive-By.”
Good night.
Well, how about Limbaugh’s comment today that Obama “… looks at the Constitution as rich white man’s law.”
I told you I don’t listen to Limbaugh. I’ve used “boy-man” to describe irresponsible men for years and you are the first person that has ever brought race into it. Not everyone is race-bating.
Praxedes,
I never took your appellation for Obama as really inflammatory. I’ve just heard the term “man-child” applied more often to him. It might rile up the other side a little less.
But it certainly applies. Do you remember the official photo of him watching the Bin Laden operation with Hillary and the military and other advisors? I hate to say it, but it brought to mind the rather insulting observation by Bill Clinton that Obama seemed more like an intern who should be getting your coffee than a serious presidential candidate. Seeing him scrunched over, wearing a windbreaker, he did look like a “one of these things don’t belong” example.
Do you remember the official photo of him watching the Bin Laden operation with Hillary and the military and other advisors?
I don’t remember this, Hans, but I do understand I need to be careful. I’m just burned out from the “if you don’t just loooooooooove Obama, you must be a racist” mentality.
9.mshcdn.com/wp-content/gallery/flickr-year-in-photos/OsamaBinLadenDeath.jpeg
mp 7:44PM
The Founding Fathers have often been derided as rich white men and slaveholders. Yes, they owned slaves and they were rich and powerful.
So where’s the racism in Limbaugh’s comment?
Let’s try this, Praxedes:
http://www.mashable.com/w011-05/02/situation-room-pics/#13469Obama-and-Staff-in-the-Situation-Room
Whew!
Prax/others -
Certainly you are smart enough to know that, depending on your intention and the context, calling a grown black man a ‘boy’ can be racist. You can say your intent was not to be racist, and I 100% believe that it might not be – but to pretend that mp is completely nuts to even suggest that ‘boy’ can be racist is pretty lame (unless you folks live under a rock, never watch movies, don’t read the media, and are generally hermits).
I do enjoy the pictures though – thanks Hans – so nice to finally have a President with some foreign policy results. The night that the military got Bin Laden was a great night all around. My guess is that if McCain had won, Bin Laden would still be hanging out there as he probably would have pulled troops to start bombing Iran years ago.
Ex, I said I thought about it and agreed. In turn, you and mp are surely smart enough to understand that not everyone sees Obama as a black man first but as a human being (albeit one many of us strongly want out of the White House.)
Thanks for the photo Hans. I wouldn’t have caught the problem with that photo either without someone pointing it out to me but understand how some would.
Yeah mp – stop being so sensitive! :-)