baldilocks

Taking "Dictation"

Mary Mitchell at the Chicago Sun-Times plays a recognizable game:

There is no institution in the black community more respected than the black church. And the notion that white pundits can dictate what constitutes unacceptable speech in the black church is repulsive to most black people.

This tactic is becoming old—pretending that criticism or disagreement is “dictating.” Mitchell wouldn’t know an actual dictator if Robert Mugabe walked up to her and introduced himself.

Yes, Ms. Mitchell, white pundits and any other pundit in this country can and will criticize what anyone one publicly declares, especially when the declaration is televised. (And since when did PBS studios, the Detroit chapter of the NAACP and the National Press Club or even Trinity United Church of “Christ” become the “black church?”) When any pundits start advocating that Reverend Wright be fined or confined for his words, then it’s time for you to start whining complaining. Not before. And if some black people are “repulsed,” that’s their problem. Grown folks expect criticism; children in adult bodies mistake criticism for being dictated to. "Don't tell me what to do!!! You're not my mama!!!"

As much as I want to see Obama make history by becoming the first black man to be elected president, I don't want to see a warrior like Wright denigrated to prove to white voters that Obama is not a radical.

When Obama denounced Wright's angry words but refused to disown him, it signaled that he understood the sensitive tightrope he is being forced to walk.

His "outrage" over Wright's latest remarks signals something quite different. With the gap narrowing, Obama advisers are obviously scrambling for every white vote.

But really, what more should blacks have to sacrifice? Their dignity?

Frankly, Obama and Wright risk becoming metaphors for the ongoing struggle of blacks to unite politically.

Obama shouldn't have held a press conference to deal with Wright.

He should have been able to pick up the phone.

Sigh.

My boyfriend and I concurred that Obama's nomination will split this country--even if he loses to McCain in the general election. Prior to a few months back, BF had not known about most of the senator's short-comings--my honey's a busy man--and, in spite of being a conservative, he had wanted his sons to see the example of a black man becoming POTUS in order to plant the idea that, perhaps, they could shoot for that goal as well. And he's not the only black man I've heard express this desire.

I think that too many Americans of all races--but especially black Americans--still don't know enough about Obama and, even if they do, are thinking selfishly about him and not thinking strategically.

They're not thinking about the job which Obama is applying for. Hint: not to be an example to anyone's children.

My guy and I talked a lot about the subject, but the bottom line is this: Obama isn't running just to be the president of black America or to be emblematic of black pride. (That he would be the latter is beside the point.) He's not running in order end the "ongoing struggle of blacks to unite politically." (Did you see my eyes roll just now?) He's running to be the leader of all Americans.

People like Mitchell can’t quite wrap their minds around this concept. That’s why she can speak approvingly of Wright, expect Obama to defer to him and expect whites to be silent about it all in the same op-ed.

Along with holding the subconscious notion that Obama should abide by the rules of black solidarity, many black Americans seem to be desperately clinging to Obama as if he’s the last best hope for a black American to become POTUS for the next hundred years. As if, among millions of other Americans who are black, there’s not one person who would be a likely candidate in the next few elections. No one. So “we” have to latch on to this one right now, regardless of what the rest of the country wants, regardless of the sparsity of the man’s political record and regardless of content of this man’s character and the demonstrable quality thereof.

• This man is for pulling out of Iraq and against it.
• This man is against NAFTA and for it.
• He barely knows Tony Resko but has financial dealings with him.
• He barely knows terrorists William Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn but has been a guest in their home and has worked with the former.
• His pastor and spiritual adviser for 20 years—the same man who baptized him, performed his marriage ceremony and baptized his children—espouses a human-centered, racial supremacy (per)version of Christianity, but he never knew anything about it. And, suddenly, the man never was his spiritual adviser.

People like Mitchell want you to stop "dictating" to Obama and Wright and want you to roll over in the manner that a dog will do to show subservience to the "tide of history" and, interestingly enough, she wants Obama to do the same for Wright.

Trust me, the phrases “first black American POTUS” and “black pride” will ring hollow in the ears of us all if this Sower of Discord is nominated and it will even more so if he is elected. And only a fool—or a racist--would expect those who love this country to be silent about it.

(Thanks to Omnibus Driver)

Memo to Fox News Commentators

Specifically to Misters O'Reilly and Hannity: please stop inviting Al Sharpton to either your TV shows or your radio shows, as he speaks for neither black Americans nor Christians but only for himself and the easily deluded--or reasonably well-compensated--who surround him.

Barack Obama made a call for nonviolence in the aftermath of the Sean Bell verdict - infuriating the Rev. Al Sharpton, who accused the presidential candidate of trying to "grandstand in front of white people," sources told The Post.

And please don't be fooled by the statement regarding Obama's repudiation of Jeremiah Wright, which Sharpton issued today.

Sharpton, a politician and reverend, said, “What Barack Obama did was a profile in courage,” and said it demonstrated the kind of leadership “I not only respect, but support.”

Trust me, he only said this because he's beleatedly thinking about those invitations to your shows as well.

One more thing: rid yourselves of the out-dated notion of "black leader" in spite of what would-be black leaders try to tell you. Among most black people I know (including myself), if they have an earthly leader outside of their families, it's.....wait for it....

The pastor at the place of worship where they regularly attend. Right Senator Obama?

Sincerely,

baldilocks

(Thanks to Hot Air)

Human Shields

That's how Reverend Jeremiah Wright has used black Christians in an attempt to deflect criticism from himself.

(Thanks to Samantha Pierce)

View From Under The Bus (UPDATED)

20Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.
21Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
--Matthew 7:20-21 (KJV)

Finally, I’ve finished listening to all of the Moyers interview and the batty NAACP address by Barack Obama's pastor of twenty years, Jeremiah Wright. And, in addition, I rewatched that display of ego, half-truths—aka falsehoods--and mundane bad manners from Fox that first ran live yesterday morning. And, of course, I listened to the original sermons which brought the reverend's teachings under large-scale public scrutiny. Could you have put up with Wright’s posturing in the pulpit for twenty years? Confidence and peacockery can be entertaining as long as you know and are consistently reminded of where the focal point is—or, in this case, Who it is.

I heard Wright—the self-proclaimed Christian, preacher of the Word—mention the actions and methods of Jesus Christ and those of some who purport to be his followers. (I also heard him claim that abortion was a right.) But what Wright did not talk about was the purpose of Jesus Christ and of course he wouldn't. Because that’s where Liberation Theologies and mainstream Christianity part company. That's a crucial fork in the road; one leads to Damnation while the other does not. But don’t take my word for it. You decide.

I'll tell you what: I've never heard such a long line of strawmen strung together and wrapped up in the Word of God in my life--someone at another site call it a 'Lie Burrito'--but I only have enough time to address a few items.

Excuse my English (and pardon the pun) but who gives a DAMN about skin color, type of clothing and style of music when it comes to the realm of saving souls and keeping them out of Hell? Why, Wright and BLT’s “founder” James Cone do. As a matter of fact they worship these things instead of the Creator. Wright rightfully claims that Christian missionaries of Europe fell into error and sin back when they were bent on converting the natives of all lands. Not by the act and desire of leading others to Christ, but by making Christianity about something other than Him, His Sacrifice, Resurrection and the purpose thereof. The missionaries bound up Christ in themselves and their own culture. But Wright now is mired that same error while condemning the missionaries for it out of the other side of his mouth. Beams and motes indeed.

Guys like Jeremiah Wright care about self-centric totems of race, culture and vengeance more than they care about leading their flocks down the straight and narrow path. They need these totems to fill the void of self-doubt and that need is filled by navel-gazing religions like Black Liberation Theology and one of its parents, the Nation of Islam. Yes, BLT is a progeny of the NOI, Christianity and Marxism—a bastard child, to be sure. It’s an I-deology all right and Wright has sacrificed the eternal souls of those who believe his lies and are grateful for his good works. He has sacrificed these upon the altar of race and culture. (My own pastor says that God has special plans for shepherds—pastors—who mislead their flocks.)

Wright's megalomania is such that he couldn’t even bring himself to hold his peace for Obama’s sake—that’s one of problems inherent in allying oneself with narcissists—and even had the nerve to be guarded by the Fruit of Islam, Daddy’s the Nation of Islam’s security force.

The most infuriating thing about Wright is his attempt to cover himself using other black people, black Christians, by saying that attacks on him weren’t really about him but about the ‘black church.' And then he wants to fling around epithets like "Uncle Tom."

Let's be clear. Neither blackness, African, American or European origin, American nationality or American allegiance need a defense because such a defense would inherently be just as erroneously-focused as Jeremiah Wright's jeremiad. Ethnic origins aren’t things to be defended, denigrated or repudiated or sworn allegiance to--my own heritage stems from this continent and two other continents--these things simply are; these facts are existential. Nationality is special: it’s existential but can also be voluntarily retained or released. And allegiance to any entity is entirely voluntary, but no one has to prove his/her allegiance to this country as part and parcel of a repudiation of an ethnicity or heritage. Those days went out with FDR.

Here’s what I do come to defend, to stand in defense of: Christianity and Christians who are black. Jeremiah Wright defames both and speaks for neither and little obscure me will not let him use either as fig leaf. Yes, our ancestors in this country and our kinsmen across the water fought to be just as Christian as other Christians—as Christian as our brothers who are white. And many of the latter stood for us and side-by-side with us—not because of us primarily but because of the One Who is Primary. Has that particular battle been won? I say yes, though the war continues. But Wright not only continues to fight the battle, he willfully misunderstands the nature of the War and identity of the Enemy. And by doing that, he becomes the tool of the Enemy. That’s his choice, but not mine and not that of those who focus on the Redemption offered by Christ instead of getting upon the Cross themselves.

To quote myself, there is no “black church.” There is only the Church.

Word to Obama: thanks a lot, "brotha." Nice pastor you have there.

UPDATE: Of course, just as I finish, Obama holds a press conference to distance himself from Wright.

Sorry, Senator. You can't shake off this Tar Baby that easily.

Ms. Malkin live-blogs it.

UPDATE: I'm getting an Everybody-lanche. Thanks. I just try to listen to the Holy Spirit.

AT&T is On My List

My broadband link has been intermittent since Saturday.

I have plenty to say about Reverend Jeremiah Wright's appearances--especially this morning's horror show--but I just wanted to put up this quick blurb to explain why I hadn't said much about these things in the past few days and why it might be tomorrow before I do.

UPDATE: I hate being wrong--and wrong/right and right.

(Thanks to Phelps)

Wayne Fau

Consider this acknowledgment merely one last salute to a former commander and a good man who loved the Lord. See you There, sir.

Black Man Preaching

If there absolutely, positively must be a black POTUS right now, why couldn't it be this guy running, aside from the fact that he's probably not thirty-five yet? (slight language alert)

Black & White on the Grey Matters 2 (War)

If he were a little older, I might be in love.

(Thanks to One Cosmos)

UPDATE: I saw gray hair so maybe he's older that first thought. But I'm taken.

UPDATE: Watch the guy's whole library. Again, be mindful of the language.

BLT (Black Liberation Theology) in Action

UPDATE: I expanded the 'BLT' acronym because at least one reader didn't understand how the title and subject of this post and those of the subsequent one are related. However, at least one did.

During an interview with PBS’s Bill Moyers, retired Trinity United Church of Christ Pastor Reverend Jeremiah Wright—Black Liberation Theologian and Senator Barack Obama’s pastor and mentor for two decades—says that his words were twisted when he asserted that God should damn America for its crimes; crimes both real and perceived.

“I felt it was unfair,” Mr. Wright said, according to excerpts of the interview released Thursday. “I felt it was unjust. I felt it was untrue. I felt for those who were doing that, were doing it for some very devious reasons.”

In Mr. Wright’s sermons, he suggested that Americans bore some responsibility for the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, saying “America’s chickens are coming home to roost.” He also blamed the government for the spread of AIDS among African-Americans, characterized the United States government as corrupt and referred to the “U.S. of K.K.K. A.”

He did not apologize or back away from his remarks in the interview, instead saying that people wanted to paint him as “some sort of fanatic.”

“It’s to paint me as something — ‘Something’s wrong with me. There’s nothing wrong with this country … for its policies. We’re perfect. Our hands are free. Our hands have no blood on them,’” he said. “That’s not a failure to communicate. The message that is being communicated by the sound bites is exactly what those pushing those sound bites want to communicate.”

When asked what the people who aired the clips “wanted to communicate,” Mr. Wright said, “I think they wanted to communicate that I am unpatriotic, that I am un-American, that I am filled with hate speech, that I have a cult at Trinity United Church of Christ. And by the way, guess who goes to his church, hint, hint, hint? That’s what they wanted to communicate.”

Megalomaniacs—a special species of narcissist--want the right to say and do anything they wish, but will deem any criticism of what they say and do as “unfair” (or "evil," if they have some power over the critic). The criticism is never an honest difference of opinion or a mistake. And of course it is utterly impossible that the words, deeds and/or judgment of the narcissist are ever wrong. EVER. So it must be that those who oppose the narcissists words/deeds/judgment are willfully wrong and, therefore being unfair and unjust.

It is “unfair,” you see, to have a different opinion than Reverend Wright because, in his mind, any idea of his, especially one springing from his religion—a religion specially made for the self-indulgent--falls automatically in the realm of Good. Conversely, any opposing idea--specifically, opposing the idea that America is a whole-scale Oppressor, a Devil according to BLT--falls automatically under the rubric of the Enemy and will be judged as “unfair." (This is also how Left Orthodoxy determines Good and Evil which makes sense, since all Liberation Theologies are born of Marxism. Don't forget, both BLT and the Left are all about earthly justice. But don’t take my word for it.)

Mr. Wright, who has acted as Mr. Obama’s spiritual mentor and retired in February as pastor of Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago, said that he has never heard Mr. Obama repeat any of his controversial statements.

“Absolutely not,” Mr. Wright said. “I don’t talk to him about politics. And so he had a political event, he goes out as a politician and says what he has to say as a politician. I continue to be a pastor who speaks to the people of God about the things of God.”

Mr. Obama publicly denounced Mr. Wright’s remarks, a reaction Mr. Wright said “went down very simply.”

“He’s a politician, I’m a pastor,” he said. “We speak to two different audiences. And he says what he has to say as a politician. I say what I have to say as a pastor. But they’re two different worlds.”

He added, “I do what I do. He does what politicians do. So that what happened in Philadelphia where he had to respond to the sound bytes, he responded as a politician.”

Did the reverend just admit that he and his former acolyte were performing the “good-cop, bad-cop” routine--one seeming to represent a "post-racial" America while the other asserts the inherent evil of same? I think he did.

These two are trying to run a game on the white-guilt prone part of the Electorate and the Crazy “Uncle” spills the beans! I would say that the jig is up (RIP, Cleavon*), but the reality is…not enough of the Electorate is paying attention. Here's Hoping that will Change.

Fear not.

(Thanks to LGF)

*Faulty reference to Blazing Saddles. The 'jig' gag is from History of the World, Part I.

North Koreans, Syrians and Strong Horses

This morning, US Intelligence Officials—including CIA head General Michael Hayden*--gave a classified account to Congress as to what it knew and when it knew it with regard to the bombing of a Syrian facility by the Israeli Air Force last September. Allegedly included in the briefing is video evidence obtained from within the now-destroyed facility—a facility whose core was almost identical to a known plutonium-producing facility in North Korea. According to the article, the video shows North Koreans “touring” the facility to boot.

The WaPo article also says that this evidence could “complicate” the US efforts to strike a deal with North Korean President Kim Il-Sung Jong-il regarding his nukes. Hmmm. Sometimes I wonder whether we're really trying to “strike a deal” with such a monster anyway. It seem to me that the Bush Administration’s policy toward the Norks is more strategically-minded: putting the American seal of approval on the "negotiations" per Li'l Kim's demands, but, in reality, standing back while Kim’s neighbors put up with the bulk of his insanity. And, after the regional players tire of playing and being played, the US would sign off on whatever they decide—especially if the decision comes from the Japanese. And who could really expect a man possessing nuclear power capabilities while keeping his own people in such a state to listen to actual reason anyway? Selling the tech to the Syrians seems far more in-character for the gulag-keeper.

As for the Syrians, their ambassador to the US--Imad Moustapha—is predictably outraged at being bombed by the hated "Zionist Entity," but rightly points out that the West claimed that Saddam’s Hussein’s Iraq had a nuke program also, but no evidence of same was subsequently found. Some think that Saddam managed to move evidence of such a program to…Syria.

Captain Ed notices, however, that Syria seems less than willing to restart its program

after seeing how the Bush administration dismembered the Saddam Hussein regime in Iraq for less.

Can we call this the “Strong Horse Syndrome?” Or perhaps the Reagan Syndrome?

One wonders whether we’ll see the reverse of such a syndrome after January 20, 2009.

*General Hayden will retire from the Air Force in July, but stay on as CIA director.

Someone in the Des Moines, Iowa Business Community...

Please give this man a job--one that pays exponentially more than delivering pizza.

A pizza delivery driver, who police said defended himself by shooting a robber who attacked him, was fired from his job on Friday.

James Spiers, 38, confirmed to KCCI that he is no longer employed by Pizza Hut. Spiers said he was given two months severance pay and was offered help finding a new job by the company. [SNIP]

According to court documents, Melanie Stout, 18, called in a pizza order to an apartment building at 2050 SE King Ave. Police said her fiancee, Kenneth Jimmerson, 19, was waiting in the lobby with a gun when Spiers arrived at 10:39 p.m. on March 28.

Police said Jimmerson tried to rob Spiers at gunpoint. During a struggle, Spiers pulled out his own gun and opened fire. Spiers shot Jimmerson several times, in what police said was a justified shooting. Jimmerson survived was sent to the hospital and a couple days later moved to the Polk County Jail.

Though Spiers had a permit to carry his gun, Pizza Hut suspended its long-time delivery driver.

I'm not sure whether Pizza Hut deserves the flak that it's probably getting. After all, it's a private business and may make its own rules which an employee must follow. However, were I a pizza delivery chick, I'd carry too. After all, as one of Say Uncle's commenters points out, you can always get a new job if you get fired--but only if you're not dead.

Oh and I must say that young Melanie sure can pick 'em. I'm guessing that the nuptials have been postponed.

(Thanks to Instapundit)

Linkage, April 23, 2008

Lots of personal business to attend to today (again), but read this:

Friends of Obama from Power Line: domestic terrorists Ayers and Dohrn discuss their "repentance" in 2007. (They take the long view of history.) Read Roger L. Simon’s piece also.

Support persecuted Canadian Bloggers--buy Mark Steyn’s American Alone (deal good today only)

Cute: John and Patton Hawkins make their first vlog. (Yes, I’m thinking about it.)

Bratton explains things: "LAPD chief vows to clarify policy on immigrants"; and
40 on 40: "Forty prominent Angelenos and Southern Californians sound off about policing, illegal immigrants and the LAPD." I'm not among them but our favorite DA is!

The Pope and the President

Next month will mark the sixtieth anniversary of the Berlin Airlift; Gail Halvorsen is still alive!

To be picked up from the library: The Vision of the Anointed by Thomas Sowell

Rice versus Carter

Did the Secretary of State call the former president a liar?

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Tuesday the Bush administration explicitly warned former President Jimmy Carter against meeting with members of Hamas, the Palestinian faction that controls the Gaza Strip and which is regarded by the U.S. as a terror group.

Rice, attending a regional meeting on Iraq's security and future, contradicted Carter's assertions that he never got a clear signal from the State Department. Rice told reporters that the U.S. thought the visit could confuse the message that the U.S. will not deal with Hamas.

"I just don't want there to be any confusion," Rice said. "The United States is not going to deal with Hamas and we had certainly told President Carter that we did not think meeting with Hamas was going to help" further a political settlement between Israel and the Palestinians.[SNIP]

In an interview with NPR, Carter said the State Department did not warn him off the trip.

It sounds to me that neither Rice nor Carter are lying per se, but that Rice inadvertently gave Carter the loophole he needed to slither through in order to go and to claim that no one said not to. Here's how.

By saying that a meeting with Hamas wouldn't be 'helpful' to a political settlement between Israel and the Palestinians, Rice assumed that Carter wanted to be helpful to the Bush Administration goals and assumed that he desires a peaceful settlement--with peaceful meaning that none of parties in question is pushed into the sea.

Therefore, she assumed that merely expressing disapproval without using the explicit words "don't go or we'll revoke your passport" would work--especially on a former Head of State. Unfortunately she forgot with whom she was dealing. Jimmy Carter couldn't care less about the goals of a Republican Administration or about those of any set of Jews.

The only things that this particular former president cares about are: making himself look good and shaking off the tarbaby of his failed but mercifully short presidency. Good luck with that.

I joked about Carter being beset with dementia, but, on the real, he's got every narcissistic marble that he's ever had.

(Thanks to Lucianne)

Where Are This Man's Children?

And why don't they force him into a nursing home?

[Former President Jimmy Carter] spoke in Jerusalem after meeting last week with top Hamas leader, Khaled Mashaal, and his deputy in Syria. It capped a nine-day visit to the Mideast aimed at breaking the deadlock between Israel and Hamas militants who rule the Gaza Strip.

"They (Hamas) said that they would accept a Palestinian state on the 1967 borders, if approved by Palestinians and that they would accept the right of Israel to live as a neighbor next door in peace," Carter said.

In Damascus, Mashaal said Hamas was offering Israel a 10-year truce if it withdraws from all lands it seized in the 1967 war.

He confirmed that Hamas would be satisfied with a Palestinian state on the 1967 borders — implicitly accepting that Israel would exist alongside that state. But Mashaal stressed the group would never outright recognize the Jewish state.

"We agree to a (Palestinian) state on pre-67 borders, with Jerusalem as its capital with genuine sovereignty without settlements but without recognizing Israel," Mashaal told reporters.

Nobody's buying it; How can you offer a truce to a country which you don't believe exists? Hamas-types aren't even crafty enough to keep from contradicting Carter.

Or perhaps Hamas is having sport with a bitter old man who is possibly suffering from dementia.

If the former president's kids loved him, they would intervene. It's sad, however, to ponder that they may be as tired of him as many of the rest of us are.

(Thanks to Hot Air)

RELATED: Hamas Parting Gift.

Heretics!

Obama's father's beliefs and associations are irrelevant.

However...

The beliefs and associations (and observed judgment) of Obama himself are most certainly not irrelevant and seem to be forming a picture of the man who's running for president on character alone or the content thereof. The senator and his supporters were okay with this until the first unsavory association popped up. After that came the next one and the next one--along with the specter of a radical belief system or two--magically transforming the examination of the candidate's beliefs and association--the examination of the only elements available by which his character can be judged--into "distractions." (Then there are the vacillations, or, more descriptively, the "flip-flops"--a manifestation of the candidate's quality of judgment.)

At that, do we the People wonder aloud and in print how else the public is supposed to get a snapshot of the candidate's character unless his beliefs and associations are subject to public scrutiny? Yes.

Answer: Shame on you for not Believing! And Damn those False Prophets to Right Wing Hell!

Not even an association with a proto-jihadi like the unrepentant terrorist William Ayers--whose Weather Underground girlfriend Diana Oughton died in a "work accident" while plotting to blow up a bunch of Army sergeants at Fort Dix--can penetrate such a level of Faith.

Which is why the prospect of an Obama presidency is "more than a notion."

Fire This Time

I slept in a bit this morning due to having fallen asleep in the wee hours.

This isn't my house.

I don't know whether anyone was hurt, but I saw a barefoot older man sitting on the grass across the street from the burning house. He looked shell-shocked.

Nothing like a fire on your block in the middle of the night to keep you from sleeping, especially when you have a senior to take care of.

Check your alarms--and your parents.

Observations

I find it fascinating that one person can Sow so much Discord on two opposing sides of one political fence. I am also envious of how yet another person can embed himself so thoroughly inside the psyche of so many.

The story line that Democrats [sic] are "elitists" who look down on middle class people is taken right out of Karl Rove's playbook. It's been used for decades to convince everyday Americans to re-elect Republicans that outsource their jobs, destroy their unions and lower their wages.

I'd write more right now but I have a few responsibilities to attend to. Back later.

Moral Equivalence Illustrated (UPDATE: Video at Newsbusters)

This is what happens when they just don't get it.

(Thanks to Hot Air)

UPDATE: The reason why from TIME managing editor Rick Stengel: "We're experts in what we do." The interviewer, MSNBC's Joe Scarborough, doesn't even ask about the World War II imagery or the sacredness of Iwo Jima. "Experts" indeed.

New Media Support

I do need your support, but if it comes down to a choice, I'd rather you hit Bill Ardolino's tip jar than mine; he's going back to Iraq.

I'm going to Baghdad next week to embed with the 2/1 Stryker Cavalry Regiment operating in and around Sadr City. The showdown between the Mahdi Army and US and Iraqi government forces is currently the most important story in Iraq being covered (and miscovered) by the mainstream press, and I'd like to provide an accurate, on-the-ground perspective.

Thoughts on DC Mass

Very moving.

Why do I like this pope? Because he’s an intellect and he’s got more cojones than a whole lot of so-called men and Christians. He all talk and all action. Because he acknowledges the sins of his church straightforwardly. And I won’t quibble about all the things in which Catholics believe and I, as a Protestant, do not. We Christians are past the Shia-Sunni Discord stage.

And I’m not mad at him getting the rock star treatment during his trip here.

Is There a Manual of Which I am Not in Possession? (UDATED)

I had to come up for air to comment about this: prepare to roll your eyes and smack your forehead (in my case, fivehead) after reading this op-ed about you-know-who.

"Elitist" is another word for "arrogant," which is another word for "uppity," that old calumny applied to blacks who stood up for themselves.

Perhaps I've been taken off of the Code Word mailing list for cause.

Unwillingly, I feel a bit of admiration toward the author, David K. Shipler, for his ability to twist the definition of the word 'elitist' into a racial epithet. That takes skill.

Okay, I'll say it. Robert Johnson was :::cough::: :::hack::: correct.

(Thanks to Cuffy Meigs posting at Ace)

SOMETHING I MISSED: Cuffy finds another Shipler op-ed using a word that doesn't need to be in the Code Word manual.

TWIST AGAIN: Neptunus Lex reminds me that Dick Cavett criticized General David Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker for using high-falutin', specialized language when the latter two addressed a couple of senate committees last week--implying that the two were elitist. Does that mean that Dick Cavett is a racist? Or is that only a white-on-black crime?

What an ugly game this has become.

Work Day

I'm going to devote most of today to the three projects I have going. One of the things I'm listening to in the background, however, is the coverage of Pope Benedict's sojourn in the East Coast. (Happy Birthday to Papa Ratzi!) Go to Belief.net for the wall to wall coverage.

One thing about my projects: how does one get access to information held by Stanford University's Hoover Institution? The information on access isn't all that clear. Do I have to fly up there to retrieve it?

Oh and thanks to the people who have donated to the this site (hint: in case I do have to fly up there).

(Thanks to Michelle Malkin)

Hear That Sound?

If two people--one who's generally obnoxious and another who's an exploiter of black people--tell the truth, will anyone give a rat's backside?

The billionaire founder of Black Entertainment Television says Barack Obama would not be a leading presidential candidate if he were white and that the Illinois senator's campaign has "a hair-trigger on anything racial."

The Charlotte Observer reported on its Web site Monday that Bob Johnson, one of Hillary Rodham Clinton's top black supporters, was commenting on remarks previously made by Geraldine Ferraro, another Clinton supporter.

"What I believe Geraldine Ferraro meant is that if you take a freshman senator from Illinois called 'Jerry Smith' and he says I'm going to run for president, would he start off with 90 percent of the black vote?" Johnson said. "And the answer is, probably not.

(Thanks to Patterico)

Tear it Down

Yesterday, Barack Obama addressed the Associate Press Annual Meeting; a speech which Power Line’s John Hinderacker characterized thusly:

That's sort of like the Virgin Mary talking to a Knights of Columbus convention.

(I guess Catholic metaphors are to be expected today.)

Other reports of the meeting pointed a perennial and amusing gaffe made by AP chairman Dean Singleton—one which happens all too often when people try to wrap their tongues around the junior Illinois senator’s Luo last name.

SINGLETON: Can you imagine shifting a substantial number of Afghanistan -- a substantial number to Afghanistan where the Taliban has been gaining strength and Obama bin Laden is still at large?

OBAMA: I think that was Osama bin Laden.

John says that the entire transcript should be read for laughs, but I sure wish that Osama-Obama mix-up hadn’t happened—simply because I want to know what Obama has planned for Afghanistan.

See, I’ve been contending for some time that the anti-war Left is building up to the point at which it can characterize Afghanistan in the same manner as it has done with Iraq—as a lost cause. I’ve seen the rhetorical beginnings of it here and there (and I think Singleton's aborted question was part of that) but no one prominent is ready to say it straight out. The foundation hasn’t been sufficiently laid yet.

I say that the overt denigration of our efforts in Afghanistan is on the way (and, no, it won’t have to make sense). Why? Because every Bush effort must be demonized and scrapped--every single one, even the so-called righteous War.

The Bush edifice must be torn down. Feel free to tell me that I'm wrong.

(Thanks to Instapundit)

Grave Digging

The Right has been musing about Obama's late father--a dyed-in-the-wool commie and from a Muslim family--for some time now, with most of the musing being irrelevant since the junior Obama was abandoned by his father. Now it's the Left's turn.

At Politico, Ben Smith features an article written by the senior Obama, in which the latter discusses the Kenyan president's economic positions; Senior is basically asking whether the president should impose hardcore Communism on his country or go with baby steps. The president in question? The Kenyan Republic's first, Jomo Kenyatta. The year? 1965.

You know what? I am really less than impressed with the ability of all too many "professionals" to separate what matters from what does not--the ability to analyze information.

A bit of assistance: if a person has only had contact with his/her father twice in a lifetime, it's pretty much impossible for that father to have any meaningful influence on that person's political ideology. (Do I have to repeat myself about my own father and our divergent politics?)

Yeah, I'm helping the Left but...call it charity.

Now another decision looms--do I want to read some sixties-era economic tome written by some African dude who just received his undergrad?

(Thanks to Ed Morrissey)

Welcome, Papa

Pope Benedict XVI arrives today in the USA at Andrews AFB, MD where President Bush will meet him. Though he has been here several times, it's his first visit since becoming pope.

I'm looking forward to all of the papal reportage due for the next few days. Though I'm not Catholic and have no plans to convert, there is very much to admire about this pope, this man. And I believe that it's no coincidence that the world has a pope who has done a great deal of research on Liberation Theologies during the same time when an adherent to one of those theologies has a serious shot at becoming the most powerful man on earth.

However, am I the only one who finds it...odd for the pope to be arriving at a US military base?

(Pic courtesy of Getty Images and CNN)

Africans and Americans, Part II

People who keep going on about Obama not "legally" being an "African-American" are cracking me up. Supposedly, a "legal African American" is someone who is the descendant of Africans brought to the US to be slaves--the definition of which excludes Obama, as if the concept made sense in the first place and meant something.

Here's a quandary for all you hair-splitters on things that don't matter: since my mother is an American descendant of Africans brought to the US to be slaves but my biological father is an African, does that make me "half African-American?"

Please tell me 'yes' so I can mock you.

Kenya Heating Up Again?

Right now, I'm just pointing to it: 12 shot dead by police during protests across Kenya. Will have more to say as I gather information. My father is okay as of a couple of days ago.

Kenya: The Basics

The Other Democrat

Was Senator Clinton knocking back shots of Ta-Kill-Ya last night? She sure looked rough today as she try to hit her opponent when he was "down."

Madam's heart just wasn't in it, for some reason. I need a nap just looking at her.

One might almost feel some sympathy for her plight, if one forgets that she "once sneered at stay-at-home moms for choosing cookie-baking over work."

Spa time, Mrs. Clinton...if you can hide it from the press.