If you would like to add a comment to any of the threads here on AADB, registration with blogspot.com is not required. Simply click on the ‘comments’ link at the bottom of an essay, and either enter a nickname under ‘choose an identity’ or post your comment anonymously. Serious comments are always welcome.


Below are the two final essays to be posted on Allegiance and Duty Betrayed. The first one is written by a friend -- screen name 'Euro-American Scum' -- who, over the past four years, has been the most faithful essayist here. He has written about everything from his pilgrimage to Normandy in 2004 to take part in the 60th–year commemoration of the invasion, to his memories of his tour in Vietnam. His dedication to America’s founding principles ... and those who have sacrificed to preserve them over the past 200+ years ... is unequaled. Thank you, E-A-S. It has been a privilege to include your writing here, and it is a privilege to call you my friend.

The second essay is my own farewell. And with it I thank all of the many regular visitors, and those who may have only dropped in occasionally, for coming here. I hope you learned something. I hope a seed or two was planted. But, even if not, I thank you for stopping by ... 25 March, 2010


The Truth About Black Liberation
Theology and Trinity Church

Black Liberation Theology.jpg

Despite the efforts of most of the main stream media (and Obama himself) who are trying to spin the incidents regarding Barack Obama's preacher and spiritual advisor into something acceptable to the American people, along with his speech regarding race, by doing some individual research it becomes clear that the spin will simply just not wash.

Let me preface what I am about to say by stating emphatically that I do not believe the teaching of Reverend Wright or Black Liberation Theology are at all subscribed to by most blacks in this country. I believe it is a minority of radicals whose voices are being given dispproportionate weight in our media. I have many friends in the black community who are traditional Christians who accept Jesus Christ and His aotnement and teaching for the love, long suffering, reason, and forgiveness that they represent to all of us, of all creeds and colors alike.

But the Trinity Church of Christ, to which Obama belongs, subscribes to Black Liberation Theology, which we shall see does not represent those things, and therefore gives voice to Reverned Wright's and others' hateful dialog.

I believe that Obama will not leave that Church for one simple and obvious reason. Despite his new found disgust in "some" terminology that Wright employed, Obama in all likelihood agrees with the theology that the church teaches. He is raising his kids in it, and intends to stay with it.

Most of us feel strongly about the Christian churches we attend. If the clergy depart from the theology that we accept in our hearts, we leave them and find a congregation and doctrine that we subscribe to and will make better men and women of us (through the atonement of Jesus Christ) and allow us to help others. If the clergy sticks with the theology we accept in our hearts, we stay with them.

Obama is staying with the Trinity Church and continues to remain close to Wright, despite Wright's disgusting statements...and to be sure, these statements are not statements from one or two sermons alone. No, Reverend Wright is an ardent supporter and preacher of Black Liberation Theology which is at the heart of who he is and what he has said.

This same Black Liberation theology subscribed to by Trinity is clearly what Obama subscribes to. His actions in this regard tell us so. He's been going and donating to that particular church for over twenty yerars. As stated, he is raising his kids in it, immersing them...baptising them into it. And Reverend Wright has done the immersing and baptising.

While it is true that that church has done a lot of good in the black community, helping them to rise socially, taking care of their needy, it is also true that the underlying doctrine must be understood in order to bring into focus the good it does and reconcile it against the hate its preacher also spreads.

That theology can easily be reconciled to its good actions in the black community and the hateful rhetoric it employs by simply studying it. This is something that most of the main stream media has either not done, or refuses to do, because the underlying doctrine is so repulsive that it should negate any major candidate in any way closely associated with it...and that is something that most of the media and the DNC do not want to do. Again, Black Liberation Theology is the admitted theology of Reverend Wright and the congregation. It is something that has helped form Obama and his views and it is therefore worthwhile to understand if we intend to consider him for the office of the Presidency.

It is not your traditional Christian message in the least.

Wright admits that he preaches his brand of that theology which is based, in part, on the works of one James Hal Cone, the recognized pioneer in the black brand of this theology, and someone who has been the Charles Augustus Briggs Distinguished Professor of Systematic Theology at Union Theological Seminary in the City of New York.

Wright refered to Cone and his "pioneering" efforts in his contentious interveiw with Sean Hannity on Fox News in 2007, HERE.

Cone himself is much written and describes this theology in his book A Black Theology for Liberation, which is one of many books he has written. One notable quote in that book decribing Cone's Black Liberation Theology is as follows:

"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."

That theology accepts a perverted and wrested interpretation of Jesus Christ where it describes him as a poor black man (or man of color) living under oppressive white European rule (the Romans) and that he was as much about social change and bringing down government as he was about spiritual liberation. He therefore meets Cone's (and adherants to this perverted view of our Savior) criteria for a God who supports their black power insurgency against what they describe as the ruling rich white men and women in America.

This interpretation perverts the love of all men that Christ taught, the peace, the forgiveness, and inner, spiritual focus of Christ and His atonement, which teaches us that the change His atonement brings within us heals us spiritually, creating a new man fashioned after Christ who teaches by example, love, and long suffering.

Speaking of these qualities, Cone sarcastically states in the book:

"There is no use for a God who loves white oppressors the same as oppressed blacks. We have had too much of white love, the love that tells blacks to turn the other cheek and go the second mile."

As if this love, and Christ's own words regarding it, are somehow a construct of the white race to keep people of color down. Disgusting, and really very, very tragic that people are being raised on this hate...because that is exactly what it is...and Cone says so.

"Black hatred is the black man's strong aversion to white society. No black man living in white America can escape it... While it is true that blacks do hate whites, black hatred is not racism. "

Thus Black Liberation Theology changes Christ, the God of peace and love, into a God of their own construction, a God of hate and revenge, who is hell bent on political and social change at any cost and who supports that hate and "revenge" to suit their needs.

This is the message about Obama's "church" (and others like it) that needs to be spread. I repeat, I do not believe it is at all subscribed to by most blacks in this country, and certainly not by society at large. But it has been hidden, growing...festering, and flying under the radar in these radical churches and because of political correctness it has been heretofore untouchable. But now the cat is out of the bag.

It is shocking, is is disgusting...and it is dangerous.

It is in no way related to, or derived from, American foreign policy or society. The fact is America, despite its problems and mistakes, has set more people free (even through a horrific civil war of our own) and and given them individual liberty (and thus individual accountability) and therefore truly assisted more people's on this earth than any other nation on it.

...and there is the rub. Christ teaches that all men are created equal in God's eyes, and that they are individually responsible for their actions with an inate ability to "Come unto Him" and be free. The American constituion, despite changes that required fire and blood to address (and, OBTW, that blood was shed in the civil war principally by white men fighting to, among other things, preserve the Union and free the blacks), sets down in law the same principles.

This theology, Black Liberation Theology, is a blatant attempt to mix and wrest and perevert Christianity into a construct for the age old battle against individual rights. It is a Marxist ideological, collective, class-struggle, and ultimately tyranical construct committed to destroying individual freedom.

This same type of liberation theology has been used for decades in Latin America to pervert Catholics and goad them into rising into Marxist rebellions in class warfare.

That is what this is...and it is the version accepted and practised by black radicals in this country and it is intent on changing this country into a socio-marxist state where wealth, opportunity, and position are not earned by individuals, but instead are handed out by the state...and in this case they simply want to be the ones in control of redistributing it all for their purposes and what they call "their" people.

by Jeff Head
(contributing team member of Allegiance and Duty Betrayed)


robmaroni said...


This is brief, to the point, and every word as frightening as it is true.

Too bad we won't see it on the front pages of the NYT, LAT, or the like.

Well done, Mr. Head.

marcus aurelius said...

Here's an excerpt from another excellent exposé on this hate-filled "theology" from American Thinker:

The sad truth is that neither the Reverend Wright nor black liberation theology is being misunderstood. Both, thanks to the candidacy of Barack Obama, are being exposed. God, in fact, works in mysterious ways. And unless it's the aforementioned liberals and Democrats who are trying to hush up Wright, Moss and others of their ilk, sensible Americans want to hear more, for knowledge is power, the power to combat hate.


You seem to agree, Mr. Head, and I salute you for it.

Jeff Head said...

Thank you. I am forwarding the info to as many people as I can, asking them to do the same.

I am also forwarding it to as many news outlets (of all stripes) as I can and asking others to do the same.

If there is enough outcry, the info will get out. If by no other means, then by our own email chains themselves.

God bless, and may He (and I mean the true Jesus Christ, God of love, mercy, forgiveness and atonement) be with and support us through these perilous times.

Jeff Head said...

Than you marcus aurelius!

I too believe that God's Hand is in this. The truth is coming out, and people are responding to it...researching it themselves, and coming to the clear conclusions.

May we continue to help in that endeavor.

Again, than you, and God's best to you and yours.

kathymlynczak said...

A church is defined by its message, and a minister is the dispenser of that message. There is no way on earth church member can sit through services in Trinity Church for 20 years and not realize that its minister is filled with hate for white people and America.

Barack Obama contributed his money to Trinity Church and uses its teaching to raise his children.

He is a fraud and God help us is he becomes President of the United States, but as somebody said on another thread, if he does we get what we deserve because we either agree with his views or we haven't done our own homework on what they are.

You hit the nail on the head, Jeff Head. Thank you for writing this.

Anonymous said...

From Intelligent Conservatism: Young Conservative Thinkers Still Exist:

My question has never been whether or not Barack Obama is a Muslim. My question has been simply whether or not Barack is a sympathizer of people like Jeremiah Wright, Louis Farrakhan and James Cone. Barack thoroughly answered my question during his speech yesterday when he addressed Wright’s anti-Americanism by saying…“but the truth is, that isn’t all that I know of the man. The man I met more than twenty years ago is a man who helped introduce me to my Christian faith, a man who spoke to me about our obligations to love one another; to care for the sick and lift up the poor” he went on to say “I can no more disown him than I can disown the black community.”

Can this guy be our president?

Jeff, your answer seems to be "Hell no!" I agree.

cw-patriot said...

Jeff, your research and commentary are both well done and well said, as always. All American voters need to know precisely what kind of ‘theology’ Reverend Wright dispenses from the pulpit each week. They also need to do some analysis of the ‘theology’ to which Barack Obama has been exposed for more than twenty years – and to which he has chosen to expose his children for their entire young lives. The American voter also needs to consider what those choices genuinely imply.

A church is loosely defined as a body or organization of religious believers, and a minister is loosely defined as the church’s spiritual overseer.

Both the sermons that Pastor Wright has delivered, and the literature that is readily available in the library of Trinity Church, clearly define that church as one that has as its core belief the theology of black liberation. No one could possibly attend Trinity Church for more than twenty years without recognizing that its main message is that of black liberation theology, as you have described in all its hate-filled ugliness above.

The only rational explanations (I invite the possibility of others, but sincerely doubt that they exist, other than in the mind of leftist apologists) for Barack Obama’s continued membership in, and regular attendance at, Trinity Church are:

(1) He embraces the belief that man has the right to pour God into his own mold, and to demand of God that He fulfill certain man-authored prerequisites in order to deserve worship -- and those prerequisites to which man may hold God accountable may include hatred toward another race, and even the desire to inflict harm on that race

- or –

(2) Obama does not believe (1) and (2) above, but condones a spiritual advisor and overseer who does, and willingly supports (both spiritually and financially) the dissemination of life- and civilization-altering spiritual messages with which he vehemently disagrees.

If such a man is elected to the presidency, then we will have placed in the position of leader of the free world a man who either (1) despises the white race, or (2) possesses the foresight, principles and convictions of an alley cat.

A commenter here recently wrote, ‘If we elect this man, it will mean that either (1) we agree with the hate-filled, anti-American philosophy defined by black liberation theology, or (2) we haven’t done our homework regarding this man’s genuine beliefs.’

I believe I know the American people well enough to know that we have yet to reach the point at which we are willing to accept the hate-filled rantings of BLT believers as true and deserving of respect.

But I also believe that ignorance and apathy are now rampant among the voting public, and there is a clear and present danger that this man will indeed rise to the presidency, simply because not enough of us are sufficiently informed to comprehend the ramifications of such a watershed event. He is, after all, charismatic (how I despise that word). And, unlike the historical kind of toxic charisma that has unleashed all manner of human tragedy in a cult-like setting, Obama’s particular brand of charisma – worst case scenario -- can conceivably bring down a republic, and affect the entire course of world history.

~ joanie

Jeff Head said...

As alweays, well said Jaonie.

It now falls to each of us as God-fearing (meaning the one God of Abraham Isaac and Jacob and His Son...and not the invention of conspiring men), patriotic Americans who have found out the truth of this shameful, dangerous ideology, to spread the word and in as reasoned a manner as possible, to put the truth of it before the American people.

I believe God in Heaven has provided the opportunity, to the chagrin of the deceivers, to see the truth...and He has also provided the means (the internet, the forums, the blogs, the email chains, faxes, snail mail, phones, etc) so that we can dissiminate the message if we have the will.

It is the self same will of our founders and the original correspondences of liberty that they used through word of mouth and their mail system. We are empowered today to do the same and I believe if we exert oursleves, God will make our weaknesses strong and the word will get out and have its impact to the astonishment of our enemies.

Anonymous said...

If such a man is elected to the presidency, then we will have placed in the position of leader of the free world a man who either (1) despises the white race, or (2) possesses the foresight, principles and convictions of an alley cat.

You can say that again.

siliconvalleyguy said...

Good work, Jeff. Good response, Joanie.

calbrindisi said...

From The New Republic: Far Wright:

He should have took a page out of McCain's handbook--give a brief statement and move on. He didn't keep speaking on his lobbying scandal yet you hear Obama on every station, morning noon and night trying to shore up the dam.

If you can ignore the bad grammar, try focusing on the attention given to damage control and no attention being given to the real issue.

What a rag.

Montypython2 said...

"Most of us feel strongly about the Christian churches we attend. If the clergy depart from the theology that we accept in our hearts, we leave them and find a congregation and doctrine that we subscribe to and will make better men and women of us (through the atonement of Jesus Christ) and allow us to help others. If the clergy sticks with the theology we accept in our hearts, we stay with them."

That's the bottom line in all of this. That Obama says he "didn't know" is a lie. That he says he was waiting for the minister to retire is a lie.

We don't need another liar in the White House, especially one who lies about something so important in the character of the person who will be leading America in these troubling times.

Jeff Head said...

Exactly Montypython2...Obama's explanations are simply not credible and very transparant and full of holes to anyone who actually stops to think about them.

In addition, what sort of man throws his own grandmother under the bus in making a national speech that is trying to preserve his political position? equating her private remarks and errant words (if indeed there ever really were any) to the very public and disgusting hate speech of Wright?

That says much more about the man as well, even if he did say it so calmly and smoothly.

paul Nicholas said...

In addition, what sort of man throws his own grandmother under the bus in making a national speech that is trying to preserve his political position? equating her private remarks and errant words (if indeed there ever really were any) to the very public and disgusting hate speech of Wright?

I don't think that aspect of this whole issue has been emphasized enough. It's reminiscent of Bill Clinton: never willing to admit fault or come clean and always looking for someone else to play the scapegoat. Picking his own grandmother was the coward's way out. I appreciate the point you made and I wish more people would make it.

John Cooper said...

"While it is true that that church has done a lot of good in the...community, helping them to rise socially, taking care of their needy..."

Say, isn't that what the media used to say about the Taliban?

Jeff Head said...

kathymlynczak, IMHO, Obama is the worst sort of fraud. He is a literal wolf in sheep's clothing, wooing and mesmerizing the sheep.

His policies and his socio-maxist, hate-America black liberation value system will rend this Republic to pieces.

We have been left with no really good choices in this Presidential election...but we are faced wth two monumentally horrific ones who we must defeat. I am coming to the conclusion, as unebleivable as it may seem, that Obama is the worst of those two.

God help us make progress, God help us hold some ground and particularly to help avoid the worst, and perhaps in so doing, be able to make some ground in the House and Senate with the good choices that are available there.

Jeff Head said...

John Cooper, they are not unlike the Taliban or radical Islamics of all sorts in their hate. But, they also hide amongst us and use our very system to fester and grow.

At some point they will reach a stage in their development where they are more embolden...and then I believe they will take on other qualities of the Taliban or Al QUida we see manifest around us today.

There were certainly those of that ilk in the 60's. This current Black Liberation Theology is the development of that unrest and hate, where it has put on its full ildeological and religious basis. We would be crazy to think that there are not those who harbor the same violent tendancies amongst them today, who are biding their time, and who desire the same methods be employed as those that marked this movement's inception.

And there enemy will not only be whites, but also what Reverend Wright calls the "ignorant black" who do not share their world view.

Another trait they share with the radical Islamics.

John Cooper said...

Obama: We are Building a Religion, a great music video (turn up the volume).

Jeff Head said...

That video sums up a lot of the mania.

I particularly liked, and thought appropriate, the pictures where he is taking folks to the edge, and then they all jump off the cliff.

I also liked the one pic of him with the large crowd and the poster that says "Investigate 911". That would be a good one to spread around along with him standing there blandly while the other democratic candidates have their hands over their heart at the singing of the national anthem.

Anonymous said...

Nice work, Jeff Head. Facts backed up by common sense commentary.

ronitafromdallas said...

A very good column, Mr. Head. I wish it could be run in every major newspaper across the country.

If Barack Obama is so "race transcendent" why does almost everything his church has to offer the public relate to black people?


trustbutverify said...

Weak minds are led to believe anything that is put forward by an experienced dynamic orator, like Wright or Obama.

If Obama has learned anything, he has learned from Wright how to capture his audience, tell them the things they want to hear, make them believe you are a healer, make them promises about thier future, and plant the seeds of distrust.

Obama's wife is more transparent than he is. Just by her arogance she is showing us all what he is all about when the camera is off.

n said...

Obama is a zero. Like all zeroes he's simply a place holder. Now that they've attempted to give the general (comatose) public the "show" of an election process, they can install whomever they choose. Looking at the coronated choices it matters little who gets the nod.

Clinging to the election process is counter-productive. Until activists demonstrate their disgust publicly, belligerently and persistently, no practical change will be effected.

Both parties have completely ignored their constituents on all major issues such as the war, the border, and privacy concerns. Slaves have no voice.

Anonymous said...


The South side of Chicago is the location of the black hate group the Nation of Islam.

The South side of Chicago is the location of Jesse Jackson's groups.

The South side of Chicago is the location of two major anti-white black gangs---the Vice Lords and the Black Gangster Diciples.

Those two gangs are active in the major US prisons.

The South side of Chicago is the center of black Hate doctrine for the entire US.

Obama's wife was a militant from this very area.

Obama chose to affiliate himself with a black Hate 'church' in that very location.

Obama's stupid wife opened her stupid mouth and started the ball rolling for the exposure of where Obamas is really coming from.

The so-called 'religion' espoused by these black Hate groups is very similar to islam in its basic goals.

Obama obviously originally set himself to be successful as a politician from this cesspool of black Hate.

As a local Chicago politician and and as State level politician his plan worked.

As a national politician it was inevitable that his roots would be exposed.

"God Dam* America" indeed.

Anonymous said...

This place is a breath of fresh air. Thank you!

Jeff Head said...

Thank you ronitafromdallas.

I believe snippets of this information are getting out all over the country...and well they should.

When you take this information (as if it were not enough in and of itself) in conjunction with Obama's Rezko connection, and add to it his direct connections to the former leader of the Weathermen Underground, William Ayers, who is a professed domestic terrorist (and here's a link of a February 2008 story regarding it: http://www.nysun.com/article/71421)...a more and more deeply troubling and even horrific picture is painted.

This man, who is tied to so many abject anti-American groups and people, was about to bluff his way into the Presidency.

The info is coming out now...but we must continue, IMHO, to spread the word.

Anonymous said...

How can a man who sat under Jeremiah Wright's preaching for twenty years, a man who refuses to wear a flag pin, a man who will not even put his hand over his heart when the National Anthem is played possibly have a legitimate chance of becoming President of the United States?

How can a man whose wife (after living a privileged life and going to Ivy League universities) says that she's never been proud of her country until her husband ran for President, even be considered.

Jeremiah Wright is an anti-American racist, pure and simple who still holds all whites responsible for slavery and the repression of black people.

Barrack Obama says that he's only heard him preach about Jesus and God. In other words, he just happened to miss all the anti white, anti American sermons.

It is extremely hard to believe that Wright only preached these sermons selectively, making sure Obama was not in the congregations when he preached them. And I submit to you that he did not just start preaching these negative sermons in the last couple of years. I think Mr. Wright has been harboring these thoughts in his heart for a long time.

If Mr. Obama has been going to his church for twenty years the odds of him not witnessing or hearing about at least one of these venomous diatribes are too high to even contemplate.

How can a man go to a church where the pastor preaches such a virulent anti-white message and expect to be elected to the highest office in the free world? Doesn't he have to be the President of all the people, white included?

Before some of you cherry pickers out there get on your high horse and accuse me of being prejudiced against Obama because he's black, let me say this. I don't care about the race or gender of the President of the United States, I just want the best person in the job and if I felt Barrack Obama was that person I'd vote for him in a New York minute.

I know that Obama has said that he doesn't agree with Wright's rants but he hasn't outright denounced them, called them scurrilous and divisive as they surely are.

And where are the New York Times front-page articles? I will guarantee you that if Pat Robertson had even uttered one anti-black word in one of his sermons it would have been splashed all over the front pages of America and a feature on the TV news shows.

And what if he had partnered up for a trip to a foreign country with the grand dragon of the Ku Klux Klan? What do you think the reaction would have been?

Yes the old double standard is at work again, but this time it's too little, too late. Fox News, bless them, has forced the issue and made it impossible to ignore, and rightfully so.

The people of this nation have a right to know.


Jeff Head said...

Charlie Daniels has a way of cutting to the heart of the issue.

The answer to how Obama can do this is wrapped up in this very article. He subscribes to this Black Liberation Theology.

Someone should ask him straight-up that exact question.

danthemangottschall said...

"Someone should ask him straight-up that exact question."

It'll never happen face-to-face, only vicariously by people like Limbaugh or Hannity.

Jeff Head said...

He's afraid of going on either of those shows.

But, you might see a question regarding it if he wins the nomination and gets into the debates. Not from McCain directly...but from either a write-in, or from one of the moderators.

We'll see. Either way, the word is getting out and Obama's numbers are suffering (as well they should) for it.

lori_gmeiner said...

Obama's number aren't suffering anywhere near as much as one would think, Jeff.

From the polls I've read, his approval rating has dropped 3-5%. I would have expected it to be cut in half. Very disappointing! The American people are either much further left than I thought, or much more ignorant.

Jeff Head said...

I believe a lot of them simply do not know the depth of the problem as regards Obama's core beliefs.

The MSM and DNC are certainly not going to inform them. Talk radio is...and the internet can.

As people find out information like that contained in this article, they quickly decide against him.

I believe we have to keep getting the message out within our own spheres of influence through email chains, forums, blogs, word of mouth etc. and then asking our friends, relatives and neighbors to do the same.

lori_gmeiner said...

Jeff, I admire your writing and I think this column is right on the money, but I don't agree with you about people not knowing Obama's core beliefs.

I think smoothe talk is more important than character these days. If it weren't, then the likes of Bill Clinton wouldn't have been elected twice. What Clinton did with the Chinese and the Indonesians and Juanita Broddrick and others was every bit as awful as what Obama believes in and acts like and it didn't matter a whit to the American voters. "The economy was good."

When honesty and integrity doesn't matter anymore, our country is on its way out. I've cried more than once because most of my countrymen don't really know what makes up a good leader anymore. Pretty words and catch phrases are much more important than honesty.

Jeff Head said...

Well, when the same issues (virtually) as today were vetted in 2004, 65 million people got out and gave a majority win to the President over the socio-marxist, leftist Kerry.

As to Clinton, he never won a clear majority and in fact without 3rd party candidacies from Perot, drawing away the vote, he would have lost in a major way.

I opine that character and honesty have always been and always will be important...even if the people move away from it. Ultimately, without it, we the people will be in much worse shape and the pendulum will swing as a result of natural consequences.

That can be avoided if we continue to work with and educate others. I still believe that the more people who know these thigns about Obama (and, BTW, the equally horrific things about Hillary), the more who will turn out and vote against them.

In this election, even though our own choice in Mccain is far from what you or I or most on this board would desire, it is better (at least IMHO) that the absolute train wrecks and desolaion to our Republic that either Obama or Hillary would inflict.

lori_gmeiner said...

With all due respect Jeff, why do we have to "work with and educate others?"

All of our founders (Thomas Jefferson and Thomas Paine especially) always warned us that vigilance was going to be the main requirement to maintain our freedom.

If the majority of Americans are so ignorant that we always have to force feed them facts and truths then vigiliance is becoming rare in this country.

Candidates of character have already been eliminated for that very reason.

This is the kind of thing that buys votes these days (a description from a new column by Jonah Goldberg):

"He (Obama) is not operating on the same plane as ordinary politicians, he is the agent of transformation in an age of revolution, as a figue uniquely qualified to open the door to the 21st century" (Gary Hart)

"An Obama victory would bring about a quantum leap in American consciousness." (Deepak Chopra)

"Barack Obama is our collective representation of our purest hopes, our highest visions and our deepest knowings. He's our product on the all knowing quantum field of intelligence." (Eve Konstantine)

All 3 of those quotes are typical of liberals defending Obama, and all 3 of them mean more to the average American than your intelligent article above. Why? Because they have a nice ring to them.

I don't disagree with anything you've said about Obama but I disagree with your faith in the American people.

lori_gmeiner said...

P.S. I don't disagree that we have to work hard to get out the real truth about Obama. I am doing that and so are you. I just believe that because we always have to work so hard and most Americans don't even care enough to find out on their own our country isn't "vigilant" anymore and our founders were right when they predicted that that would be our downfall.

First_Salute said...

* * *

Why we should fear a Medvedev presidency of Russia.

Because at the *Financial Times* (ft.com), the un-balanced article appears, this Monday evening (2008-03-24):

"Why we should fear a McCain presidency"
- by Anatol Lieven

Basically that author would have us believe, that Russia has Georgia to fear, when backed up by the U.S. under McCain's "nationalism."

*That* is so typically Russian propaganda when, as you will see on the main ft.com webpage, the top article reference is:

"Medvedev warns on expansion of NATO"

The usual agitprop, Medvedev good, McCain bad.

Russian "reason-able-ness" (formerly known as "We come in peace.") in the form of yet another polemic from academia, the cradle of student un-rest.

Brought to you by all commies, all the time, and Bill Moyers, no doubt. Coming to an election near you.

I'll place a bet, here, that the vast majority of graduation speechs at academia, this May and June, will be similar to the article bashing McCain and familiar sounding to the "student movement" of the Vietnam Era, and the current bumper crop that is obsessed with the same intolerance of anything not under *its control.*

* * *

Jeff Head said...

lori, thank you fpor your comments and insights. I do have faith in the American people. Probably because of my travels across this land on business and as a result of various efforts and events I have been involved in.

A lot of people just do not get involved. Most of those people are good folks. The same was true clear back to the revolution. Many people believe on about 25-30% actively resisted and 25-30% wanted to actively stay with the crown. This left 40-50% who simply wanted to be left alone.

I believe that large group can be reached as conditions warrant, and I believe most of them are inclined to support basic values and our foundational American principles which the left only wishes to tear down.

In the end...each of us alone must make the decision as to whether we will be vigilant or not. If enough of us decide to do so, then our influence and efforts will be enough. I do not think it does, or has ever taken a majority in that regard.

Agains, thanks for your comments and thoughts...and for your own efforts on behalf of our Republic.

II Chron 7:14

lori_gmeiner said...

Jeff, the only part about all of this that we don't agree is that I know that our founders warned us that we as a people had to remain vigilant in order for our republic to survive. As a people we no longer care. We don't know our own history. We don't take the time to understand the threats to our country. We're too busy enjoying our affluence and being entertained to do what our founders warned us we had to do.

Yes there are people like you and me who are trying to inform others but it becomes harder and harder every day, especially when our children aren't brought up knowing what is required and illegals are coming across our southern border by the thousands every day.

"The heart of America" is no longer vigilant. I know that doesn't mean we shouldn't keep trying to inform people, but the American people in general are "good" as you say, but they are also purposefully ignorant and "good" isn't enough in today's world.

lori_gmeiner said...

Brought to you by all commies, all the time, and Bill Moyers, no doubt. Coming to an election near you.

I'll place a bet, here, that the vast majority of graduation speechs at academia, this May and June, will be similar to the article bashing McCain and familiar sounding to the "student movement" of the Vietnam Era, and the current bumper crop that is obsessed with the same intolerance of anything not under *its control.*

I think everybody on this blog would place that same sad bet First Salute. Thanks for posting this.

marcus aurelius said...


"Propaganda" used to be something we Americans associated with Nazi Germany or the old Soviet Union. Today the American media give those old-time disseminators of lies a real run for their money.

Jeff Head said...

Our left wing media is better at it than the Soviet Union or Nazi Germany ever envisoned.

Those folks were brute force in their propoganda. Anyone who was not one of the fanatics could just about see the truth, it's just that most were abjectly afriad to utter it. Some simply closed their eyes to it.

Here in the US there has been a lot more finesse...coupled with mis-education for a couplke of generations, and with disensitizing and a huge amount of mis-direction.

Lately, there has been hope injected because of the internet and talk radio. Inroads into the propoganda machine are being made and I believe ultimately it can be undone...but it is a hard road...and there are those who would more than happily get a lot more brute force about it.

They still have to do something about those pesky guns though before they would overcome their cowardice and try.

marcus aurelius said...

A very good point you made, Jeff- that most in Soviet Russia, and less so in Nazi Germany, probably could tell what were lies. The just couldn't voice that in public.
So you're right, in that way our media are much more artistic. They craft their lies better, and they're dealing with a public most of whom don't give a damn one way or the other. They're too busy doing more important things than to concern themselves about ferreting out the truth.