Why is that conservatives always resort to personal attacks?

[kaiser soze]

I've noticed this throughout this forum, dealt with it during discussions on politics with conservatives I know (a 28 man who lives with his mommy and daddy), and we are hearing the chants and comments made at mccain and palin's rally

Quite curious I must say

[NoFenders]

LMAO


Get over yourself. Serioulsy.


:cool:

[kaiser soze]

looks like I hit a sweet spot

GOT A PROBLEM????

:cool:

[NoFenders]

Fucking pathetic.


Is this for real. You're really that dense?

:cool:

[kaiser soze]

my point is proven

:cool:

[King PSYZ]

you should have ended that post with TA-DA!

[Documad]

When you don't have good substantive ideas, fear is your best tactic.

[RobMoney$]

(!) Message to all liberals:
When you spend the last eight years calling Bush every name in the book, you don't get to call yourself a victim of personal attacks.

[Ali]

Seems to work.

[DroppinScience]

What's that supposed to mean, campus fuckface?? :mad:

If you don't watch yourself, kaiser, you'll get punched in the throat!

[kaiser soze]

oh no! I'm a victim don't do that brett-bert or I'll throw your girlfriend under a bus!

;)

oh and

:cool:

[NoFenders]

And hypocrisy runs wild.

What a great show.

:cool:

[ToucanSpam]

I find that both conservatives and "liberals" are bad with name calling/lame personal attacks. For the last eight years G W Bush has been made fun of in every conceivable way (to the point where it isn't funny, original, or worth doing) as has his administration. Adversely, conservatives love to dish out the "bleeding heart liberal" line or "pot smoking hippie" or in the case of this board now, "campus fuckface".

Granted, G W completely deserves what he is getting, and I've meet my fair share of "campus fuckface" people in my time, but personal attacks are the last resort of people who just don't know or understand exactly what to attack. If you want to hit people where it hurts, attack their policies and their mistakes. Everyone's favorite leftist pundit Jon Stewart has mastered the art of political satire when it comes to G W. Personally, I'm a bit bored with his eight years of Bush jokes, but he's done it the best.

Right wingers are guilty of being melodramatic just as much: see Bill O'Reilly or the recent screeching and crying from FOX:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YInuTc3C3jM

Laughable.

[jennyb]

this thread makes me giggle

[RobMoney$]

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/11/negative.ads/index.html



Both campaigns spending about the same on negative ads


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The race for the White House is being waged in the final weeks in American living rooms through a blitz of negative campaign commercials.
Both Sens. John McCain and Barack Obama are throwing large amounts of money into TV ad campaigns this year.


http://i.cdn.turner.com/cnn/.element/img/2.0/mosaic/base_skins/baseplate/corner_wire_BL.gif


And though Sen. Barack Obama's campaign circulated a University of Wisconsin Advertising Project study earlier this week indicating all of Sen. John McCain's ads are negative compared to just 34 percent of Obama's, both campaigns are spending about equal amounts on attack ads.
An analysis of campaign commercials aired over the last seven days shows Obama outspent McCain nationwide by more than 2-1: $21.5 million vs. $9.2 million.
But just under half of the money Obama is spending is going toward negative spots, meaning the Illinois senator is roughly keeping pace with his GOP rival when it comes to negative commercials, in terms of cash spent.
Campaign Media Analysis Group's Evan Tracey, CNN's consultant on campaign advertising, said Obama's cash advantage over McCain provides the Illinois senator with a luxury McCain cannot afford: the means to run both positive and negative TV spots.
"McCain (http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/candidates/john.mccain.html) is almost all negative because he needs to be," Tracey said, adding that McCain is "behind in the polls and outgunned."

"He can't afford the positive ads Obama can. ... It's not likely McCain can raise his own positives with only weeks left but he can raise Obama's negatives."

The campaigns' ad spending patterns over the last week also show the two men are each attempting to drive home a vastly different message in the dwindling days of the race.
Obama is directing his heaviest dollars to television spots that attack McCain's health care plan, while the majority of McCain's money is behind ads that portray Obama as an out-of-control tax-and-spender and one who voted against funding troops in Iraq and Afghanistan.
It's all part of a concerted effort from both campaigns to hammer a few dominant messages through the clutter of the 24-hour news cycle, endless campaign skirmishes, and the chattering class.
Tracey said viewership of the ad buy "is what drives home the messages, not the day-to-day stories."
For Obama (http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/candidates/barack.obama.html), that message is health care and the threat he says McCain poses to it, namely that McCain is proposing to "tax health care, not fix it," according to one ad receiving heavy rotation this week.
It's an argument the campaign thinks will resonate with middle-class swing voters uneasy about the country's financial woes and perhaps fearful of their own job security. It's also an issue that has demonstrated particular salience with women voters this election cycle -- the key voting block this year that appeared initially to be drifting towards the GOP ticket after Sarah Palin was named to the No. 2 spot.
Conversely, McCain and the Republican National Committee are invoking themes that were successful in defeating Democratic presidential candidates in past elections, running spots that portray Obama as a significantly left-of-center politician who wants to raise taxes and cut off war funding.
The McCain ad airing the most over the past week is a 30-second spot called "Dangerous" that claims Obama voted to cut off funding for the war and says he is "too risky for America."
Another McCain ad receiving nearly as much play alleges Obama voted to raise taxes in the Senate 94 times and says he's "not truthful" on the issue.
And with just over three weeks to go until voters weigh in, it's likely the tit-for-tat negative ad war won't let up.
"This is what the final leg of this race is about, not getting outdone," Tracey said.


...but I thought conservatives were the only ones who are going negative?

[QueenAdrock]

There's a difference between going negative and resorting to personal attacks. Things like "John McCain voted against environmental legislation" is a negative ad. Things like "John McCain has an illegitamate black baby" is a personal attack. It has nothing to do with his policies or whatever else, it's trying to make people afraid of HIM, not his policies.

I haven't heard Obama make personal attacks on McCain (just left-wing non-affiliated organizations), but I have heard McCain try to link him to Ayers. It's because he wants the people to think "Oh, Obama's palling around with terrorists! Therefore, if he's ever elected, he'll try to blow up the White House within his first few weeks of being President since he obviously hates America and our infidel government, too." That's a bunch of crap. Everyone with any kind of a brain can see that Obama is no terrorist, and to try to link him as one is a baseless, personal attack.

[RobMoney$]

Please. As if Obama hasn't tried to bring up the weak Keating 5 and Pastor Hagee associations.

And LOL @ you tring to spin McCain going personal when many are saying the exact opposite:

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/nation/6052344.html

Is Rev. Wright a legitimate target?

Supporters of McCain ask why he isn't raising questions about rival's ex-pastor


WASHINGTON — As John McCain's campaign hits hard at some of Barack Obama's past associations, one person closely tied to the Democratic candidate is conspicuously absent from the attacks: the Rev. Jeremiah Wright. It is an omission that some Republican strategists and McCain supporters find puzzling and frustrating.
In advertisements, in Web videos and on the campaign trail, McCain repeatedly heaps scorn on Obama for his ties to convicted Chicago financier Antoin "Tony" Rezko and to William Ayers, a former member of the Weather Underground, the violent 1970s radical group. The Republican nominee never mentions Wright, the controversial black minister once described by Obama as his spiritual adviser and whom some strategists see as a better target than Rezko or Ayers.
McCain made it clear this spring, after Wright's inflammatory sermons became a problem for Obama, that he opposed making the pastor a campaign issue. When the North Carolina Republican Party aired an ad using clips of Wright's sermons to cast Obama as an extremist, McCain condemned the commercial at a town hall meeting.
"All I can do is publicly state that that is not in keeping with the tradition of the party of Abraham Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt and Ronald Reagan," McCain said. "And I will bring every pressure to bear that I can to stop it."
And in a letter to the state party chair, McCain said the ad "degrades our civics and distracts us from the very real differences we have with the Democrats."
His reluctance to bring up Wright was on display this week at a rally in Waukesha, Wis.

The association game

There, a black radio talk show host beseeched the candidate to make an issue of the "shady characters" once affiliated with Obama, mentioning Wright by name.

"I am begging you, sir, I am begging you," said James Harris, who hosts a radio show in Milwaukee. McCain changed the subject to the economy.
"When your spiritual adviser is behaving like a race-baiting hatemonger, that's something voters should know about," said Alex Vogel, a Republican strategist who is not affiliated with the McCain campaign.
Another Republican strategist, who did not want to be identified criticizing the campaign, was more pointed. "It's just silly," he said. "If you're going to play the association game, play the association game.
"There is a much tighter connection, both in terms of their relationship and in terms of the politics of it, between Obama and Reverend Wright than between Obama and William Ayers," the strategist said. "Most people these days think the Weather Underground was a band."
Even McCain's running mate, Sarah Palin, has suggested that the campaign ought to make more of Obama's links to Wright. In an interview this week, she told columnist William Kristol, "I don't know why that association isn't discussed more." But, she added, "I guess that would be a John McCain call on whether he wants to bring that up."

'Maybe they're saving it'

The split within the Republican camp illustrates the racial landmines that are strewn about the presidential contest. Abigail Thernstrom, a conservative who writes about racial issues, believes the McCain campaign is afraid to bring up Wright for fear of being labeled racist.

"They're just terrified," she said. "People play the race card in two seconds, and it's the nastiest card you can play."
The McCain campaign's reluctance has surprised even some of Obama's black supporters. "I keep waiting for it," said Julian Bond, chairman of the NAACP. "When is this happening? When is this coming? Maybe they're saving it."
Wright, a former pastor of Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago who officiated at Obama's wedding and baptized his two daughters, said in a sermon after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks that "America's chickens are coming home to roost" for the country's own acts of "terrorism."
The controversy forced Obama to give a major address on race relations that drew praise from some commentators, including Thernstrom, but was criticized by others for not going far enough in condemning Wright. After the pastor repeated some of his more contentious views in subsequent appearances, Obama cut off contact with him, and he has dropped out of sight.
Donna Hammond-Miller, media coordinator for Trinity, said that Wright, who has retired as the church's pastor, is "not accepting any interview requests from the media and would have no comment."
After his initial insistence that Wright should not be an issue, McCain relented a bit, saying: "I can understand why the American people are upset about (Wright's comments). I can understand that Americans viewing these kinds of comments are angry and upset."
But having taken Wright off the table at one point, the McCain campaign would be presented with another problem if it now goes after him. "Race is not the reason," said the Republican strategist. "They don't care. It's the charge of hypocrisy which is the deadliest of all political sins."
In his campaign, McCain's initial public promises not to make Wright an issue have held sway. Aides have consistently said they will not use the pastor as a bludgeon against Obama.





The only reason Obama isn't going personal on McCain is because he can't. Going personal on a war hero sounds like a brilliant strategy.

Perhaps if Obama wasn't associated with soo many radicals then McCain wouldn't have soo much ammo to use against him.

Ayres
Rezko
Wright
Pfleger
Al-Mansour
Khalidi


...but if we ask questions about these people we're being personal, or some have even suggested racist.
Give me a break. Nothing hurts racial tensions more than when the race card is thrown in front of things that have nothing to do with race.

[QueenAdrock]

Rob, you have to ask yourself what you think these personal attacks mean, what they are suggesting. Keating 5 suggests that McCain had "poor judgment" about the situation (the findings report says, not me). His seeking out Hagee's endorsement (a man who is discriminatory and right-wing religious nut) suggests that he may be just as "Christian" as Bush is and may try to keep this country on the wacky religious track it's on today.

Reverand Wright suggests that Obama hates America, correct? However, unlike Hagee, Obama never sought out his endorsement. As a matter of fact, Obama condemned him for what he's said and left the church. As for Ayers, it's someone from his way, way past who he met up with later in life, when they were both stable, productive members of American society working on eduction issues. However, his ties are suggesting that he's a terrorist.

So I've looked at the issues. Keating 5 is worrisome to me because it did come to the conclusion that McCain exercised poor judgment (and it's even scarier that it had to do with savings and loans scandals). His pursuing Hagee's endorsement is worrisome to me because it suggests that McCain wants to reach out to evangelical fundamentalist voters, and I believe church and state should be kept seperate.

Conversely, how have the Obama issues affected you? Does Ayers worry you because you think Obama may be a terrorist? Does Wright worry you because you think Obama hates America?

Do you see what I'm getting at here? The attacks against McCain relate to policy issues, things that people may want to know in regards to how he may run the country. The attacks against Obama are to instill fear in the people that Obama is a card carrying Muslim extremist who hates America.

I understand the Rezko issues or ACORN or whatever else that may be seen as "legitimate issues", but this shit about trying to tie him to terrorists and America-haters is NOT about the issues whatsoever. It's trying to play to people's fears and stereotypes of Obama.


The only reason Obama isn't going personal on McCain is because he can't. Going personal on a war hero sounds like a brilliant strategy.

It seems like you forgot 2004.

[RobMoney$]

Apparently CNN finally got around to investigating the Obama-Ayres connection.
They were much more than "neighbors" or "a guy I pass in the street sometimes".

http://www.breitbart.tv/?p=190343


This is disturbing to me QA, because not only is there the obvious issue of dishonesty yet again, but it's yet another radical. Obama's policies clearly reflect the influence of such radicals with the whole "redistribution of wealth".

Oh you can bet there's gonna be "Change" alright.

[Laver1969]

Apparently CNN finally got around to investigating the Obama-Ayres connection.
They were much more than "neighbors" or "a guy I pass in the street sometimes".

http://www.breitbart.tv/?p=190343


This is disturbing to me QA, because not only is there the obvious issue of dishonesty yet again, but it's yet another radical. Obama's policies clearly reflect the influence of such radicals with the whole "redistribution of wealth".

Oh you can bet there's gonna be "Change" alright.

I guess I don't see anything new here. What's the big deal...the Anneberg Foundation? I've heard the story and explanations and it's still not a big deal to me.

Has this Ayers connection caused him to act differently since he's been a United States Senator?

[Dorothy Wood]

oh my god, how horrifying! ayers is a monster! they supported the peace school!? holy shit! that's so radical! we're all going to die if obama becomes president! once a terrorist, always a terrorist!


for god's sake, obama's not a terrorist. give me a fucking break. I didn't see anything in that clip that hasn't already been talked about.

[DroppinScience]

Obama's policies clearly reflect the influence of such radicals with the whole "redistribution of wealth".


Really? From what I've heard they're trying to paint the influence of "such radicals" as meaning "Obama's a terorrist for having such ties." I haven't heard anything about how they're insinuating that he believes in redistribution of wealth because of Ayers.

If that's what you take from it, I think it's quite a leap. Their investigation into the ties between Obama and Ayers is to paint Obama as a terrorist. And their investigation into Wright is to play up the fear of Obama being an angry black man who hates America.

[RobMoney$]

oh my god, how horrifying! ayers is a monster! they supported the peace school!? holy shit! that's so radical! we're all going to die if obama becomes president! once a terrorist, always a terrorist!


for god's sake, obama's not a terrorist. give me a fucking break. I didn't see anything in that clip that hasn't already been talked about.


Where did I say he was a terrorist?


What you saw in that clip was confirmation to what Obama has tried to deny. He's much more than just a neighbor to Ayres and he's a fucking liar to boot.

And I don't believe it's McCain's job to hold Obama's feet to the fire for all these associations with radicals. It's the press's job, and the fact that they've resisted doing so and continually give him a pass on everything speaks volumes. I'm 100% sure if it were anyone else from Palin to Bill Clinton, that they'd be so leniant.

[RobMoney$]

Really? From what I've heard they're trying to paint the influence of "such radicals" as meaning "Obama's a terorrist for having such ties." I haven't heard anything about how they're insinuating that he believes in redistribution of wealth because of Ayers.

If that's what you take from it, I think it's quite a leap. Their investigation into the ties between Obama and Ayers is to paint Obama as a terrorist. And their investigation into Wright is to play up the fear of Obama being an angry black man who hates America.

Redistribution of wealth is a prototypical opinion held by all radicals including Robin Hood himself.

[King PSYZ]

ATTN CITIZENS

FROM THIS POINT FORWARD IF YOU KNOW, SPEAK FRIENDLY WITH, OR ASSOCIATE WITH ANY CURRENT OR PAST CRIMINAL, TERORIST, MALCONTENT, OR OTHER UNDESIREABLES AS THE GOVERNMENT SEES FIT REGARDLESS OF SENTANCE SERVED OR PARDONS YOU WILL BE FOUND PROBABLE AND GUILTY OF COMMITING THOSE SAME CRIMES.

MAY THE ONE TRUE GOD BLESS THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

[RobMoney$]

Again, where did I accuse Obama of being a terrorist, you smug asshole?

If he had nothing to hide then why'd he lie?
Sorry, but I have a problem with people who want to lead my country and are proven liars.

[King PSYZ]

pot paging mr kettle
pot paging mr kettle

you're black...


Don't for one second dare you try and pull the talking points wool over my eyes or anyone else's. It's an insult to our intelligence. Pander to those who think Faux news is fair and balanced...

You want to honestly tell me Sarah Palin and John McCain continue to bring up Ayers ad nauseum because it means that he's some radical commie that will redistribute wealth from all of us rich white folk to the poor people who don't work?

Jesus... I guess that's why Palin has used the words TERRORIST(S) in her stump speaches, I guess that's why the campaign runs ads with the words RADICAL and DOMESTIC TERRORIST...

For fucks sake, and you dare call anyone here smug while you spew forth bullshit and talking points and belive we can't see the forrest for the trees?

[Knuckles]

Again, where did I accuse Obama of being a terrorist, you smug asshole?

If he had nothing to hide then why'd he lie?
Sorry, but I have a problem with people who want to lead my country and are proven liars.

Are you seriously going to try and tell us that McCain isn't a liar?

[DroppinScience]

Redistribution of wealth is a prototypical opinion held by all radicals including Robin Hood himself.

So when you read "Robin Hood" you thought the Sheriff of Nottingham was the hero? :confused:

[RobMoney$]

Robin Hood is a fairy tale, and so is Obama's economic policy.

[Dorothy Wood]

Where did I say he was a terrorist?


What you saw in that clip was confirmation to what Obama has tried to deny. He's much more than just a neighbor to Ayres and he's a fucking liar to boot.

And I don't believe it's McCain's job to hold Obama's feet to the fire for all these associations with radicals. It's the press's job, and the fact that they've resisted doing so and continually give him a pass on everything speaks volumes. I'm 100% sure if it were anyone else from Palin to Bill Clinton, that they'd be so leniant.


by saying that obama "pals around" with terrorists, they are trying to make people believe that he is a terrorist or supports terrorism. Obama didn't deny that he was on a committee with Ayers. yes, he has tried to downplay his association with him, but he never denied he was on a committee the guy.

ayers has dedicated his life to improving society by working from within to reform public education. he is not a terrorist anymore. and when he was, he was acting out against our government when it was basically terrorising other countries around the world.

the weathermen were active 40 years ago. 40 years ago! back when there were all kinds of violent uprisings in america for civil rights and against the vietnam war. it was a different time. none of us know what it was like. ayers and his wife turned themselves in. they were cleared of charges. and all of the weathermen were in their late teens and early 20's.

I guess people aren't allowed to have second chances.

[RobMoney$]

LOL

Now that we've proven that he's lied, we're not going to hold him responsible for that. Instead we're going to give absolution to Ayres and minimize what he did?
Whatever makes you sleep better at night Dorothy. :rolleyes:


Let me ask you this, if you knew someone had molested a child 40 years ago, would you trust them to watch your child for an extended period of time?

What about Manson? He committed his crimes around 40 years ago. Do you forgive him? He's guilty of trying to inspire a change in society just like Ayres did.

[Knuckles]

Let me ask you this, if you knew someone had molested a child 40 years ago, would you trust them to watch your child for an extended period of time?

What about Manson? He committed his crimes around 40 years ago. Do you forgive him? He's guilty of trying to inspire a change in society just like Ayres did.

Rob, the shallow end of the pool is that way.
*points to the left*
Please go back.

[Dorothy Wood]

LOL

Now that we've proven that he's lied, we're not going to hold him responsible for that. Instead we're going to give absolution to Ayres and minimize what he did?
Whatever makes you sleep better at night Dorothy. :rolleyes:


Let me ask you this, if you knew someone had molested a child 40 years ago, would you trust them to watch your child for an extended period of time?

What about Manson? He committed his crimes around 40 years ago. Do you forgive him? He's guilty of trying to inspire a change in society just like Ayres did.


do you even know what ayers did? do you know what our government was doing when ayers did what he did? did you know that he was "citizen of the year" in 1997? and that plenty of people forgave him long ago because he's worked so hard to improve education?

being a young misguided activist is nothing like being a child molester. the weathermen targeted specific places and did not intend to kill anyone. what they did was stupid and reckless, but it was no where near on par with manson. jesus. you can't see the forest for the trees.

[King PSYZ]

political dissident /= pedophile
"domestic terrorist" /= serial killer sociopath

I love the word terrorist, you'd swear we made it up here in America. Honestly, when they're on our side they're "rebels" or "guerilla fighters" or the tear jerking "freedom fighters".

When they're on the other side they're terrorists, radicals, etc...

Now don't get me wrong, what Ayers did was pretty much batshit crazy. But again, his work in the Weather Underground as a 19/20 year old has absolutely nothing to do with his relationship with Obama or his campaign.

Ayers is not involved with Obama's campaign in the slightest, Obama and his campaign have stated that Ayers will not be involved with his administration, cabinet, or advisors. Obama worked with him on the education reform board THAT WAS FUNDED BY GOPers, TIED TO MCCAIN...

Obama's policies can't be tied to the actions of a man not affiliated with his campaign that took place 40 years ago... When Obama was 8.

But something like the Keating scandal does speak to McCain's character and his policy since that was something he participated in. And stop yourself before you throw the "cleared by congress" hat into the ring because that one invalidates your claim against Ayers, and two proves nothing since it was only recently that McCain has pretended nothing happened where up til this year he's always admitted it was his biggest sin and political mistake.

[jennyb]

It seems like Obama is not giving into really discussing these matters because of just this... it turns into this he said she said circus sideshow when there are waaaaaay bigger fish to fry like the economy and two wars. This to me is the kind of thinking of an evolved highly educated man who won't give into pointless trash talking. The kind of character I expect in my President.

[RobMoney$]

you can't see the forest for the trees.

Ladies and Gentlemen, this is the person who's opinions you should follow.
Thanks for that Dottie.

[RobMoney$]

I realize that I'm not going to change anyone's vote, so I'm really not interested in anyone's opinion on this article.
If you're interested in reading about Obama's associations with Ayres & Wright, then check it out. If you're not then click onto something else and save the smug retorts.
Take it for what it's worth.

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YTQ0YjhlOGVhYjQ0OWRhZjI2MmM4NTQ4NGM5Mjg0MzU=

Wright 101
Obama funded extremist Afrocentrists who shared Rev. Wright’s anti-Americanism

By Stanley Kurtz

It looks like Jeremiah Wright was just the tip of the iceberg. Not only did Barack Obama savor Wright’s sermons, Obama gave legitimacy — and a whole lot of money — to education programs built around the same extremist anti-American ideology preached by Reverend Wright. And guess what? Bill Ayers is still palling around with the same bitterly anti-American Afrocentric ideologues that he and Obama were promoting a decade ago. All this is revealed by a bit of digging, combined with a careful study of documents from the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, the education foundation Obama and Ayers jointly led in the late 1990s.

John McCain, take note. Obama’s tie to Wright is no longer a purely personal question (if it ever was one) about one man’s choice of his pastor. The fact that Obama funded extremist Afrocentrists who shared Wright’s anti-Americanism means that this is now a matter of public policy, and therefore an entirely legitimate issue in this campaign.

African Village
In the winter of 1996, the Coalition for Improved Education in [Chicago’s] South Shore (CIESS) announced that it had received a $200,000 grant from the Chicago Annenberg Challenge. That made CIESS an “external partner,” i.e. a community organization linked to a network of schools within the Chicago public system. This network, named the “South Shore African Village Collaborative” was thoroughly “Afrocentric” in orientation. CIESS’s job was to use a combination of teacher-training, curriculum advice, and community involvement to improve academic performance in the schools it worked with. CIESS would continue to receive large Annenberg grants throughout the 1990s.

The South Shore African Village Collaborative (SSAVC) was very much a part of the Afrocentric “rites of passage movement,” a fringe education crusade of the 1990s. SSAVC schools featured “African-Centered” curricula built around “rites of passage” ceremonies inspired by the puberty rites found in many African societies. In and of themselves, these ceremonies were harmless. Yet the philosophy that accompanied them was not. On the contrary, it was a carbon-copy of Jeremiah Wright’s worldview.

Rites of Passage
To learn what the rites of passage movement was all about, we can turn to a sympathetic 1992 study published in the Journal of Negro Education by Nsenga Warfield-Coppock. In that article, Warfield-Coppock bemoans the fact that public education in the United States is shaped by “capitalism, competitiveness, racism, sexism and oppression.” According to Warfield-Coppock, these American values “have confused African American people and oriented them toward American definitions of achievement and success and away from traditional African values.” American socialization has “proven to be dysfuntional and genocidal to the African American community,” Warfield-Coppock tells us. The answer is the adolescent rites of passage movement, designed “to provide African American youth with the cultural information and values they would need to counter the potentially detrimental effects of a Eurocentrically oriented society.”

The adolescent rites of passage movement that flowered in the 1990s grew out of the “cultural nationalist” or “Pan-African” thinking popular in radical black circles of the 1960s and 1970s. The attempt to create a virtually separate and intensely anti-American black social world began to take hold in the mid-1980s in small private schools, which carefully guarded the contents of their controversial curricula. Gradually, through external partners like CIESS, the movement spread to a few public schools. Supporters view these programs as “a social and cultural ‘inoculation’ process that facilitates healthy, African-centered development among African American youth and protects them against the ravages of a racist, sexist, capitalist, and oppressive society.”

We know that SSAVC was part of this movement, not only because their Annenberg proposals were filled with Afrocentric themes and references to “rites of passage,” but also because SSAVC’s faculty set up its African-centered curriculum in consultation with some of the most prominent leaders of the “rites of passage movement.” For example, a CIESS teacher conference sponsored a presentation on African-centered curricula by Jacob Carruthers, a particularly controversial Afrocentrist.

Jacob Carruthers
Like other leaders of the rites of passage movement, Carruthers teaches that the true birthplace of world civilization was ancient “Kemet” (Egypt), from which Kemetic philosophy supposedly spread to Africa as a whole. Carruthers and his colleagues believe that the values of Kemetic civilization are far superior to the isolating and oppressive, ancient Greek-based values of European and American civilization. Although academic Egyptologists and anthropologists strongly reject these historical claims, Carruthers dismisses critics as part of a white supremacist conspiracy to hide the truth of African superiority.

Carruthers’s key writings are collected in his book, Intellectual Warfare. Reading it is a wild, anti-American ride. In his book, we learn that Carruthers and his like-minded colleagues have formed an organization called the Association for the Study of Classical African Civilizations (ASCAC), which takes as its mission the need to “dismantle the European intellectual campaign to commit historicide against African peoples.” Carruthers includes “African-Americans” within a group he would define as simply “African.” When forced to describe a black person as “American,” Carruthers uses quotation marks, thus indicating that no black person can be American in any authentic sense. According to Carruthers, “The submission to Western civilization and its most outstanding offspring, American civilization, is, in reality, surrender to white supremacy.”

Carruthers’s goal is to use African-centered education to recreate a separatist universe within America, a kind of state-within-a-state. The rites of passage movement is central to the plan. Carruthers sees enemies on every part of the political spectrum, from conservatives, to liberals, to academic leftists, all of whom reject advocates of Kemetic civilization, like himself, as dangerous and academically irresponsible extremists. Carruthers sees all these groups as deluded captives of white supremacist Eurocentric culture. Therefore the only safe place for Africans living in the United States (i.e. American blacks) is outside the mental boundaries of our ineradicably racist Eurocentric civilization. As Carruthers puts it: “...some of us have chosen to reject the culture of our oppressors and recover our disrupted ancestral culture.” The rites of passage movement is a way to teach young Africans in the United States how to reject America and recover their authentic African heritage.

America as Rape
Carruthers admits that Africans living in America have already been shaped by Western culture, yet compares this Americanization process to rape: “We may not be able to get our virginity back after the rape, but we do not have to marry the rapist....” In other words, American blacks (i.e. Africans) may have been forcibly exposed to American culture, but that doesn’t mean they need to accept it. The better option, says Carruthers, is to separate out and relearn the wisdom of Africa’s original Kemetic culture, embodied in the teachings of the ancient wise man, Ptahhotep (an historical figure traditionally identified as the author of a Fifth Dynasty wisdom book). Anything less than re-Africanization threatens the mental, and even physical, genocide of Africans living in an ineradicably white supremacist United States.

Carruthers is a defender of Leonard Jeffries, professor in the department of black studies at City College in Harlem, infamous for his black supremacist and anti-Semitic views. Jeffries sees whites as oppressive and violent “ice people,” in contrast to peaceful and mutually supportive black “sun people.” The divergence says Jeffries, is attributable to differing levels of melanin in the skin. Jeffries also blames Jews for financing the slave trade. Carruthers defends Jeffries and excoriates the prestigious black academics Carruthers views as traitorous for denouncing their African brother, Jeffries. Carruthers’s vision of the superior and peaceful Kemetic philosophy of Ptahhotep triumphing over Greco-Euro-American-white culture obviously parallels Jeffries’ opposition between ice people and sun people.

More of Carruthers’s education philosophy can be found in his newsletter, The Kemetic Voice. In 1997, for example, at the same time Carruthers was advising SSAVC on how to set up an African-centered curriculum, he praised the decision of New Orleans’ School Board to remove the name of George Washington from an elementary school. Apparently, some officials in New Orleans had decided that nobody who held slaves should have a school named after him. Carruthers touted the name-change as proof that his African-centered perspective was finally having an effect on public policy. At the demise of George Washington School, Carruthers crowed: “These events remind us of how vast the gulf is that separates the Defenders of Western Civilization from the Champions of African Civilization.”

According to Chicago Annenberg Challenge records, Carruthers’s training session on African-centered curricula for SSAVC teachers was a huge hit: “As a consciousness raising session, it received rave reviews, and has prepared the way for the curriculum readiness survey....” These teacher-training workshops were directly funded by the Chicago Annenberg Challenge. Another sure sign of the ideological cast of SSAVC’s curriculum can be found in Annenberg documents noting that SSAVC students are taught the wisdom of Ptahhotep. Carruthers’s concerns about “menticide” and “genocide” at the hand of America’s white supremacist system seem to be echoed in an SSAVC document that says: “Our children need to understand the historical context of our struggles for liberation from those forces that seek to destroy us.”

When Jeremiah Wright turned toward African-centered thinking in the late 1980s and early 1990s (the period when, attracted by Wright’s African themes, Barack Obama first became a church member), many prominent thinkers from Carruthers’s Association for the Study of Classical African Civilizations were invited to speak at Trinity United Church of Christ, Carruthers himself included. We hear echoes of Carruthers’s work in Wright’s distinction between “right brained” Africans and “left brained” Europeans, in Wright’s fears of U.S. government-sponsored genocide against American blacks, and in Wright’s embittered attacks on America’s indelibly white-supremacist history. In Wright’s Trumpet Newsmagazine, as in Carruthers’s own writings, blacks are often referred to as “Africans living in the diaspora” rather than as Americans.

Asa Hilliard
Chicago Annenberg Challenge records also indicate that SSAVC educators invited Asa Hilliard, a pioneer of African-centered curricula and a close colleague of Carruthers, to offer a keynote address at yet another Annenberg-funded teacher training session. Hilliard’s ties to Wright run still deeper than Carruthers’s. A close Wright mentor and friend, Hilliard died in 2007 while on a trip to Kemet (Egypt) with Wright and members of Wright’s congregation. Hillard was scheduled to deliver several lectures to the congregants, and to speak at a meeting of the Association for the Study of Classical African Civilization, which he co-founded with Carruthers and other “African-centered” scholars. On that last trip, Hilliard accepted an appointment to the board of Wright’s new elementary school, Kwame Nkrumah Academy. Speaking of the need for such a school, Wright had earlier said, “We need to educate our children to the reality of white supremacy.” (For more on Wright’s Afrocentric school, see “Jeremiah Wright’s ‘Trumpet.’”)

Wright delivered the eulogy at Hilliard’s memorial service, with prominent members of ASCAC in the audience. To commemorate Hilliard, a special, two-cover double issue of Wright’s Trumpet Newsmagazine was published, with a picture of Hilliard on one side, and a picture of Louis Farrakhan on the other (in celebration of a 2007 award Farrakhan received from Wright). In short, the ties between Wright and Hilliard could hardly have been closer. Clearly, then, Wright’s own educational philosophy was mirrored at the Annenberg-funded SSAVC, which sought out Hilliard’s and Carruthers’s counsel to construct its curriculum.

Perhaps inadvertently, Wright’s eulogy for Hilliard actually established the fringe nature of his favorite African-centered scholars. In his tribute, Wright stressed how intensely “white Egyptologists recoiled at the very notion of everything Asa taught.” As Wright himself made plain, it seems virtually impossible to find respectable scholars of any political stripe who approve of the extremist anti-American version of Afrocentrism promoted by Hilliard and Carruthers.

Ayers’s Pals
An important exception to the rule is Bill Ayers himself, who not only worked with Obama to fund groups like this at the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, but who is still “palling around” with the same folks. Discretely waiting until after the election, Bill Ayers and his wife, and fellow former terrorist, Bernardine Dohrn plan to release a book in 2009 entitled Race Course Against White Supremacy. The book will be published by Third World Press, a press set up by Carruthers and other members of the ASCAC. Representatives of that press were prominently present for Wright’s eulogy at Asa Hilliard’s memorial service. Less than a decade ago, therefore, when it came to education issues, Barack Obama, Bill Ayers, and Jeremiah Wright were pretty much on the same page.

Obama’s Knowledge
Given the precedent of his earlier responses on Ayers and Wright, Obama might be inclined to deny personal knowledge of the educational philosophy he was so generously funding. Such a denial would not be convincing. For one thing, we have evidence that in 1995, the same year Obama assumed control of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, he publicly rejected “the unrealistic politics of integrationist assimilation,” a stance that clearly resonates with both Wright and Carruthers. (See “No Liberation.”)

And as noted, Wright had invited Carruthers, Hilliard, and like-minded thinkers to address his Trinity congregants. Wright likes to tick off his connections to these prominent Afrocentrists in sermons, and Obama would surely have heard of them. Reading over SSAVC’s Annenberg proposals, Obama could hardly be ignorant of what they were about. And if by some chance Obama overlooked Hilliard’s or Carruthers’s names, SSAVC’s proposals are filled with references to “rites of passage” and “Ptahhotep,” dead giveaways for the anti-American and separatist ideological concoction favored by SSAVC.

We know that Obama did read the proposals. Annenberg documents show him commenting on proposal quality. And especially after 1995, when concerns over self-dealing and conflicts of interest forced the Ayers-headed “Collaborative” to distance itself from monetary issues, all funding decisions fell to Obama and the board. Significantly, there was dissent within the board. One business leader and experienced grant-smith characterized the quality of most Annenberg proposals as “awful.” (See “The Chicago Annenberg Challenge: The First Three Years,” p. 19.) Yet Obama and his very small and divided board kept the money flowing to ideologically extremist groups like the South Shore African Village Collaborative, instead of organizations focused on traditional educational achievement.

As if the content of SSAVC documents wasn’t warning enough, their proposals consistently misspelled “rites of passage” as “rights of passage,” hardly an encouraging sign from a group meant to improve children’s reading skills. The Chicago Annenberg Challenge’s own evaluators acknowledged that Annenberg-aided schools showed no improvement in achievement scores. Evaluators attributed that failure, in part, to the fact that many of Annenberg’s “external partners” had little educational expertise. A group that puts its efforts into Kwanzaa celebrations and half-baked history certainly fits that bill, and goes a long way toward explaining how Ayers and Obama managed to waste upwards of $150 million without improving student achievement.

However he may seek to deny it, all evidence points to the fact that, from his position as board chair of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, Barack Obama knowingly and persistently funded an educational project that shared the extremist and anti-American philosophy of Jeremiah Wright. The Wright affair was no fluke. It’s time for McCain to say so.

— Stanley Kurtz is a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center.

[Dorothy Wood]

Ladies and Gentlemen, this is the person who's opinions you should follow.
Thanks for that Dottie.


I don't understand what that's supposed to mean.


to the people who are interested: that article came from a right wing online publication, and although the "ethics and public policy center" may sound like a nonpartisan sort of watchdog group, they are in fact a socially conservative interest group. and that article has no citations.

also, I'm not sure I understand the fear of rob or others who like to bring up wright and ayers and the fact that obama may or may not have been a muslim. but wait, is he an A-rab or is he a negro? if obama gets into office is he going to round up all the white folks and turn us into slaves? will I get a pass because I have native american and hispanic heritage along with my white devilness?

it's all bullshit fearmongering. tell me rob, are you really truly afraid? if so, the neo-con machine has done their job.

[RobMoney$]

I have NEVER raised the issue of Obama's race or religion.
Stop trying to drag me into that argument because I'm not biting on that hook.


BTW, the term is "You can't see the forrest through the trees." It's supposed to imply that the person is blind to what's right in front of their face. If you're looking through the trees to see a forrest, you're already in the fucking forrest.
What you said makes absolutely no sense, but hey, maybe language arts isn't your strong suit.
The fact that I had to explain this quote to you makes me weep for the youth of America.

[travesty]

People say "You can't see the forest for the trees" all the time down here in the south. Drives me insane. I want to slap them.

I Just looked it up though and seems that "for" is the correct phrase. I guess I'll have to get used to it. Doesn't make sense to me though.

[ms.peachy]

BTW, the term is "You can't see the forrest through the trees." It's supposed to imply that the person is blind to what's right in front of their face. If you're looking through the trees to see a forrest, you're already in the fucking forrest.
What you said makes absolutely no sense, but hey, maybe language arts isn't your strong suit.
The fact that I had to explain this quote to you makes me weep for the youth of America.

Erm, no, it's 'forest for the trees'. It means being unable to see the bigger picture for being bogged down in details. Jesus H Christmas Rob, are you going out of your way to try and shoot yourself in the foot, or what?

[100% ILL]

People say "You can't see the forest for the trees" all the time down here in the south. Drives me insane. I want to slap them.

I Just looked it up though and seems that "for" is the correct phrase. I guess I'll have to get used to it. Doesn't make sense to me though.


I guess you just proved the point of the phrase in your post. And PLEASE!!! stop sounding like an angry transplant; You know you love it here.

[travesty]

I guess you just proved the point of the phrase in your post. And PLEASE!!! stop sounding like an angry transplant; You know you love it here.

No doubt. I am not Angry at all and I do love it here. Been here for 10 years now. At first I just came down here to claim what was rightfully mine after we won the war.;) I took my southern bride and got my piece of land so I think I am all square now, thanks.:D

[100% ILL]

No doubt. At first I just came down here to claim what was rightfully mine after we won the war.;) I took my southern bride and got my piece of land so I think I am all square now, thanks.:D


HAAAHAAA!!!! Haven't laughed that hard in a while. I respectfully rescind my statement and pledge allegiance to your flag. :D

[ms.peachy]

I Just looked it up though and seems that "for" is the correct phrase. I guess I'll have to get used to it. Doesn't make sense to me though.

Try mentally changing the word "for" into "due to" or "because of" and see if that helps. It's like the other old proverb, 'For want of a nail the shoe was lost' etc etc. Both come from English idioma dating back several centuries, so it's a less common usage of the word 'for' than we generally use today. Given the actual meaning of the phrase in question though, it's "through" that is really nonsensical, as it's nothing to do with looking through trees at all, it's about being able to step back and see the larger situation.

[Bob]

it's "for" as in, "if it weren't for the trees, i could see the forest"

[Bob]

I have NEVER raised the issue of Obama's race or religion.
Stop trying to drag me into that argument because I'm not biting on that hook.


BTW, the term is "You can't see the forrest through the trees." It's supposed to imply that the person is blind to what's right in front of their face. If you're looking through the trees to see a forrest, you're already in the fucking forrest.
What you said makes absolutely no sense, but hey, maybe language arts isn't your strong suit.
The fact that I had to explain this quote to you makes me weep for the youth of America.

i hope you remember this one next time you get smug about something

also, again, stop ragging on other people's language arts skills, yours aren't great either. it's forest, not forrest. forrest is a name.

[AceFace]

UGH.

got this AWFUL email from my boss today. *not the bishop* Every election i'm treated as an idiot for not being republican. they whisper behind the bishop's back b/c he is a democrat.


Soon, very soon, my dear friends......I will cease forwarding you political emails. And then - I hope and pray - I will not be sending you "told ya" emails.
Sue




Subject (andyswindell@Subject): According to Revelations !




A lot of Americans have become so insulated from reality that they imagine that America can s uffer defeat without any inconvenience to themselves.

Pause a moment, reflect back.

These events are actual events from history..

They really happened!!!
Do you remember?

1. 1968 Bobby Kennedy was shot and killed by a Muslim male extremist.

2. In 1972 at the Munich Olympics, athletes were kidnapped and massacred by Muslim male extremists.

3. In 1979, the US embassy in Iran was taken over by Muslim male extremists.

4. During the 1980's a number of Americans were kidnapped in Lebanon by Muslim male extremists.

5. In 1983, the US Marine barracks in Beirut was blown up by Muslim male extremists.

6. In 1985 the cruise ship Achille Lauro was hijacked and a 70 year old American passenger was murdered and thrown o verboard in his wheelchair by Muslim male extremists.

7. In 1985 TWA flight 847 was hijacked at Athens , and a US Navy diver trying to rescue passengers was murdered by Muslim male extremists. ( remember the pilot of this flight was from Richmond , MO )




8. In 1988 , Pan Am Flight 103 was bombed by Muslim male extremists.

9. In 1993 the World Trade Center was bombed the first time by Muslim male extremists.

10. In 1998, th e US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania were bombed by Muslim male extremists.

11. On 9/11/01, four airliners were hijacked; two were used as missiles to take down the World Trade Centers and of the remaining two, one crashed into the US Pentagon and the other was diverted and crashed by the passengers. Thousands of people were killed by Muslim male extremists.

12. In 2002 t he United States fought a war in Afghanistan against Muslim male extremists.

13. In 2002 reporter Daniel Pearl was kidnapped and murdered by-- you guessed it-- Muslim male extremists.

Now, I really don't see a pattern here to justify profiling, do you?< /SPAN>So, to ensure we Americans never offend anyone,particularly fanatics intent on killing us, airport security screeners will no longer be allowed to profile certain people...Absolutely No Profiling!
They must conduct=20 random searches of 80-year-old women, little kids, airline pilots with proper identification, secret agents who are members of the President's security detail, 85-year old Congressmen with metal hips, and Medal of Honor winner and former Governor Joe Foss, but leave Muslim Males alone lest they be guilty of profiling.

According to The Book of Revelation:

The Anti-Christ will be a man, in his 40's, of MUSLIM descent, who will deceive the nations with persuasive language, and have a MASSIVE Christ-like appeal....the prophecy says that people will flock to him and he will promise false hope and world peace, and when he is in power, he will destroy everything.

And Now:< B>For the award winning Act of Stupidity Of all times the People of America want to elect, to the most Powerful position on the face of the Planet -- The Presidency of the United states of America .. A Male of Muslim descent who is the most extremely liberal Senator in Congress (in other words an extremist) and in his 40's.
Have the American People completely lost their Minds, or just their Power of Reason ???I'm sorry but I refuse to take a chance on the 'unknown'

Candidate Obama...
Let's send this to as many people as we can so that the

Gloria Aldreds and other stupid attorneys along with Federal Justices that want to thwart common sense, feel ashamed of themselves -- if they have any such sense.

As the writer of the award winning story ' Forest Gump' so

Aptly put it,

'Stupid Is As Stupid Does'

Each opportunity that you have to send it to a friend or

Media outlet...do it!

Or again. . . Just delete if you disagree.

[travesty]

WOW! Where do you work that would tolerate this kind of inter-office e-mails?

[AceFace]

i work in a really small office. no one is monitored. they know i'm not gonna read that stuff, but they send it to me anyway b/c they think i'm young and stupid for voting democrat. last election was even worse for some reason. they'd receive those propaganda faxes and blow them up to 11x17 and put them on my desk to see first thing in the morning.

[Randetica]

i hope you remember this one next time you get smug about something

also, again, stop ragging on other people's language arts skills, yours aren't great either. it's forest, not forrest. forrest is a name.

yeah, my name.

[Dorothy Wood]

I have NEVER raised the issue of Obama's race or religion.
Stop trying to drag me into that argument because I'm not biting on that hook.


BTW, the term is "You can't see the forrest through the trees." It's supposed to imply that the person is blind to what's right in front of their face. If you're looking through the trees to see a forrest, you're already in the fucking forrest.
What you said makes absolutely no sense, but hey, maybe language arts isn't your strong suit.
The fact that I had to explain this quote to you makes me weep for the youth of America.


if you're not concerned about obama's race or religion, then why does it concern you that he was a part of "afrocentric" education? why did you post a big long thing about how he went to a muslim school in Indonesia? honestly, you don't really know what politics are like in chicago for a black man. I don't, but I know more than a lot of people who don't live here, but still like to speculate. I've also worked for the public school system, so I'm pretty sure I know more than anyone on this board about education in chicago.

so I asked you what you were afraid of. because I don't understand the point of putting up a letter like that if you're not trying to scare people, or if you're not scared of what might happen if obama gets into office.


it's clear that you're incredibly sure of yourself even when you're wrong though, so anything I say is pointless. go ahead and weep for me, I will be weeping twice as hard for you.

[Bob]

http://isobamamuslim.com/

[yeahwho]

The New York Times found the guy behind the 'Obama's a Muslim' lie. Big shocker: The Man Behind the Whispers About Obama (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/13/us/politics/13martin.html?ei=5070&emc=eta1)

Not too surprisingly (http://mediamatters.org/items/200703290011), is a total fucking nutcase (http://mediamatters.org/items/200703290011).

Mr. Martin’s depictions of Mr. Obama as a secret Muslim have found resonance among some Jewish voters who have received e-mail messages containing various versions of his initial theory, often by new authors and with new twists.

In his original press release, Mr. Martin wrote that he was personally “a strong supporter of the Muslim community.” But, he wrote of Mr. Obama, “it may well be that his concealment is meant to endanger Israel.” He added, “His Muslim religion would obviously raise serious questions in many Jewish circles.”

Yet in various court papers, Mr. Martin had impugned Jews.

A motion he filed in a 1983 bankruptcy case called the judge “a crooked, slimy Jew who has a history of lying and thieving common to members of his race.”

In another motion, filed in 1983, Mr. Martin wrote, “I am able to understand how the Holocaust took place, and with every passing day feel less and less sorry that it did.”

In an interview, Mr. Martin denied some statements against Jews attributed to him in court papers, blaming malicious judges for inserting them.

[RobMoney$]

if you're not concerned about obama's race or religion, then why does it concern you that he was a part of "afrocentric" education?

Firstly, I object to any type of school that excludes anyone. "afrocentric" whatever that means, is racist in my book.

Secondly,
African Village
In the winter of 1996, the Coalition for Improved Education in [Chicago’s] South Shore (CIESS) announced that it had received a $200,000 grant from the Chicago Annenberg Challenge. That made CIESS an “external partner,” i.e. a community organization linked to a network of schools within the Chicago public system. This network, named the “South Shore African Village Collaborative” was thoroughly “Afrocentric” in orientation. CIESS’s job was to use a combination of teacher-training, curriculum advice, and community involvement to improve academic performance in the schools it worked with. CIESS would continue to receive large Annenberg grants throughout the 1990s.

The South Shore African Village Collaborative (SSAVC) was very much a part of the Afrocentric “rites of passage movement,” a fringe education crusade of the 1990s. SSAVC schools featured “African-Centered” curricula built around “rites of passage” ceremonies inspired by the puberty rites found in many African societies. In and of themselves, these ceremonies were harmless. Yet the philosophy that accompanied them was not. On the contrary, it was a carbon-copy of Jeremiah Wright’s worldview.

Rites of Passage
To learn what the rites of passage movement was all about, we can turn to a sympathetic 1992 study published in the Journal of Negro Education by Nsenga Warfield-Coppock. In that article, Warfield-Coppock bemoans the fact that public education in the United States is shaped by “capitalism, competitiveness, racism, sexism and oppression.” According to Warfield-Coppock, these American values “have confused African American people and oriented them toward American definitions of achievement and success and away from traditional African values.” American socialization has “proven to be dysfuntional and genocidal to the African American community,” Warfield-Coppock tells us. The answer is the adolescent rites of passage movement, designed “to provide African American youth with the cultural information and values they would need to counter the potentially detrimental effects of a Eurocentrically oriented society.”

The adolescent rites of passage movement that flowered in the 1990s grew out of the “cultural nationalist” or “Pan-African” thinking popular in radical black circles of the 1960s and 1970s. The attempt to create a virtually separate and intensely anti-American black social world began to take hold in the mid-1980s in small private schools, which carefully guarded the contents of their controversial curricula. Gradually, through external partners like CIESS, the movement spread to a few public schools. Supporters view these programs as “a social and cultural ‘inoculation’ process that facilitates healthy, African-centered development among African American youth and protects them against the ravages of a racist, sexist, capitalist, and oppressive society.”

We know that SSAVC was part of this movement, not only because their Annenberg proposals were filled with Afrocentric themes and references to “rites of passage,” but also because SSAVC’s faculty set up its African-centered curriculum in consultation with some of the most prominent leaders of the “rites of passage movement.” For example, a CIESS teacher conference sponsored a presentation on African-centered curricula by Jacob Carruthers, a particularly controversial Afrocentrist.

Doesn't sound like a school that's bringing anyone together to me. It supports an extremist and seperatist view. That's important to know about the type of work Obama & Ayres were supporting in their work together.
It further leads to my point of Obama & Ayres sharing extremist opinions.

why did you post a big long thing about how he went to a muslim school in Indonesia?

I posted that article to try to give some understanding as to why people at McCain rallies were saying "Obama's a muslim". It's not that I care about what religion he is, but if Obama is telling the American public via his website that he has never been a muslim and his school records and teachers say that he was, then he's lying. I'm not concerned about what religion he is, but I do care if he's lying about it.

honestly, you don't really know what politics are like in chicago for a black man. I don't, but I know more than a lot of people who don't live here, but still like to speculate. I've also worked for the public school system, so I'm pretty sure I know more than anyone on this board about education in chicago.

so I asked you what you were afraid of. because I don't understand the point of putting up a letter like that if you're not trying to scare people, or if you're not scared of what might happen if obama gets into office.

Basically I'm afraid of the extremists such as Ayres and Wright because they will have access to the office of the POTUS if Obama is elected. And I'm afraid of the extremist views that Ayres and Obama share, such as redistribution of wealth. I'm not concerned that Obama is a muslim, buddhist, agnostic, baptist, or catholic, and I'm not concerned that Obama is African, Muslim, Hawaiian, or Caucasian. I am concerned that he's an extremist, a liar, and an inexperienced politician who is unprepared to deal with the massive pile of crap Bush is going to leave this country in, and he's even more unprepared to handle the unknown problems that will surely arise in the future years of his administration.

[kaiser soze]

So I guess you're not concerned with the x-tian zealots and AIP knocking on the palin's doors :rolleyes:

GOP slimebag sends threatening joke

http://www.tboblogs.com/index.php/news/story/top-tampa-gop-figure-circulates-joke-about-killing-obama

Al Austin, a longtime, high-level Republican fundraiser from Tampa, today sent to his list of political contacts an e-mail containing a joke that refers to the assassination of Barack Obama.

[yeahwho]

Basically I'm afraid of the extremists such as Ayres and Wright because they will have access to the office of the POTUS if Obama is elected. And I'm afraid of the extremist views that Ayres and Obama share, such as redistribution of wealth. I'm not concerned that Obama is a muslim, buddhist, agnostic, baptist, or catholic, and I'm not concerned that Obama is African, Muslim, Hawaiian, or Caucasian. I am concerned that he's an extremist, a liar, and an inexperienced politician who is unprepared to deal with the massive pile of crap Bush is going to leave this country in, and he's even more unprepared to handle the unknown problems that will surely arise in the future years of his administration.

I know you're not intending comedy, but man, that is some wacky shit. Sort of reminds me of that old Saturday Night Live skit when Michael Dukakis was partying with Willy Horton. Like the NYorker cover (http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2008/07/14/article-0-01F23B3C00000578-533_468x685.jpg).

[DroppinScience]

I know you're not intending comedy, but man, that is some wacky shit. Sort of reminds me of that old Saturday Night Live skit when Michael Dukakis was partying with Willy Horton. Like the NYorker cover (http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2008/07/14/article-0-01F23B3C00000578-533_468x685.jpg).

I agree. Is he really inviting Rev. Wright and Bill Ayers to The White House? That's some really good self-parody and melodramatic stuff.

[Dorothy Wood]

Firstly, I object to any type of school that excludes anyone. "afrocentric" whatever that means, is racist in my book.

Secondly,


Doesn't sound like a school that's bringing anyone together to me. It supports an extremist and seperatist view. That's important to know about the type of work Obama & Ayres were supporting in their work together.
It further leads to my point of Obama & Ayres sharing extremist opinions.


the article you posted uses the term "afrocentric". do you know that the south side of chicago in the areas where these schools were is 93% african american? do you know that only 8% of the entire student population of chicago public schools is caucasian? (cps.edu) and that most of the white kids are on the north side? and out of the hundreds of public school kids that I've worked with, only about 2 of them were white? do you know how "eurocentric" state curricula are? or how suburban-centric they are? I do. standard tests and state standards address information and texts that are completely unrelated to the lives and experiences of urban youth, no matter what race.



I posted that article to try to give some understanding as to why people at McCain rallies were saying "Obama's a muslim". It's not that I care about what religion he is, but if Obama is telling the American public via his website that he has never been a muslim and his school records and teachers say that he was, then he's lying. I'm not concerned about what religion he is, but I do care if he's lying about it.

just because he studied islam as a child and was documented as being muslim, it doesn't necessarily mean he's muslim. when I was a kid, I was labeled as "special needs" by my second grade teacher. it turned out that I actually had/have a very high IQ (based on official testing by psychologists, not online tests) but I just didn't learn things in a traditional manner. my learning style just didn't jibe with her teaching style, and she wrote me off as "slow". and as I mentioned before, I went to lutheran school for 4 years and was listed as a christian, but I was not baptized as christian until age 8 because it was something my parents felt needed to be done to fit in. and I no longer consider myself a christian. my point is, the labels given to you as a child don't necessarily define who you are as an adult.




Basically I'm afraid of the extremists such as Ayres and Wright because they will have access to the office of the POTUS if Obama is elected. And I'm afraid of the extremist views that Ayres and Obama share, such as redistribution of wealth. I'm not concerned that Obama is a muslim, buddhist, agnostic, baptist, or catholic, and I'm not concerned that Obama is African, Muslim, Hawaiian, or Caucasian. I am concerned that he's an extremist, a liar, and an inexperienced politician who is unprepared to deal with the massive pile of crap Bush is going to leave this country in, and he's even more unprepared to handle the unknown problems that will surely arise in the future years of his administration.

here's the thing, Ayers and Wright are "extreme" for a reason. people react in different ways to oppression. I don't think it's right to segregate, but there's a reason african americans segregate themselves. there's a reason any minority group segregate themselves. you and I don't know how it feels to be judged based on our race. yeah yeah, maybe we've encountered some reverse racism, but it's not as common as the racism suffered daily by people who clearly are non-white. fact of the matter is, so-called "american values" weren't fucking working for the black kids on the south side, so they tried to use African values...they were trying to instill some pride in these kids, because whether you believe it or not, there's a lot of self-hatred going on in the black community and it's masked and overcompensated for in a lot of ways. if they can't be a part of society in a real way, then god damn right, they're going to create their own society. and what's that got to do with you? nothing.


obama has a history of bringing people together. you might not agree with his tactics of getting in with the elite black community of chicago by being a member of trinity or working for schools that the south side black community wanted...but that's politics. I believe that in his heart he wants to do good. and when he wanted to do good in chicago, he had to prove that he was black enough to get his foot in the door with the old school to even be allowed to do good.


so save it, you don't know shit about chicago. and I only know a little bit. I don't know what it's like to be black, but in my life I know what it's like to be a poor child of a single working class mother and looked down upon because of it. I also know what it's like to be upper middle class and the bullshit elitism that goes along with it.

obama isn't perfect, no one is. and what makes me most sick about the conservatives its that they think they are perfect and that everyone should be like them. McCain has compromised everything he used to be about to win the republican nomination and he's riding on lies, trying to coast into the white house.

open your eyes. if you can be so so sure that I'm a dumb ass that you'd ream me out for what you thought was a grammatical error rather than addressing the issue at hand, that just proves that you need to reexamine what you really know vs. what you think you know.