Hannity, Clinton, Obama, Rev. Wright and “Racism 101″

Part One: "Not God Bless America. God Damn America"

What are we to make of FOX News hate-monger, Sean Hannity? Years after he gave Neo-Nazi Hal Turner a secret guest call-in number to WABC — in order to assure that his calls could always get on his radio show — Hannity recently “broke” a story about the inflammatory rhetoric occasionally used by Barack Obama’s former pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright. (Quote from Hannity: “I broke this story.”)

And, now, a desperate Hillary Clinton is piling on. Not only has she said that Jeremiah Wright “would not have been my pastor,” she also mistakenly compared Rev. Wright’s statements with those of Don Imus — which is something nobody familiar the moral asymmetries in racism would ever do.

But, first, to Mr. Hannity’s ties to Mr. Turner. It was Turner, you’ll recall, who said on the air that, except for the graciousness of white people, “black people would still be swinging on trees in Africa.” In fact, Mr. Turner, were it not for the black people originating in Africa, the earth would have no white people. Moreover, bipedalism preceded white skin by millions of years. “Swinging on trees,” indeed!

We wouldn’t be addressing Turner’s racist rants, however, had Hannity not exhibited traits of a recidivist racist by taking seemingly inflammatory comments by Rev. Wright out of context in order to smear Senator Obama. In fact (as I’ll demonstrate below), only by pulling Rev. Wright’s comments out of context, could Mr. Hannity issue his insidious warning: If Barack Obama “agreed with Wright�that would mean a racist and an anti-Semite would be president of the United States.”

Hannity’s recidivist racism goes back at least as far as March 1, 2007, when he interviewed Rev. Wright and took great pains to paint Wright’s Trinity Unity Church of Christ as a black separatist church. Here’s Hannity’s line of argument: “Commitment to the black community, commitment to the black family, adherence to the black work ethic. It goes on, pledge, you know, acquired skills available to the black community, strengthening and supporting black institutions, pledging allegiance to all black leadership who have embraced the black value system, personal commitment to the embracement of the black value system.”

“Now Reverend,” Hannity continued, “if every time we said black, if there was a church and those words were white, wouldn’t we call that church racist?”

In fact, the correct answer is: “Yes, we would.” And then, of course, we’d explain why it would be racist for whites, but not racist for blacks. Unfortunately, Rev. Wright’s answer lacked clarity: “We don’t have to say the word ‘white.’ We just have to live in white America, the United States of white America.”

Fortunately, a clue about why the answer would be, “Yes, we would,” can be found in professor Lawrence Blum’s book, “I’m Not a Racist, But�” The Moral Quandary of Race. On page 63, professor Blum writes about his encounters with white students who, like Hannity, ask “why it is regarded as legitimate for students of color to have their own organizations and activities, but not them.”

In every instance, Blum reminds them: “Within a white-dominated institution, white students do not need special support for their identity. They are much less likely to experience objectionable stereotyping and racial discrimination.” [p. 63]

Such impeccable logic, Mr. Hannity, also holds for white churches in white-dominated America.

However, why so many whites feel the need to raise such a question is, itself, an interesting question. And two students of racial attitudes appear to have the answer: “In contrast to much of the literature focusing on whites, African Americans’ racial attitudes and policy preferences seem to be driven more by their in-group bias than out-group animus.” [Vincent L. Hutchings and Nicholas A. Valentino The Centrality of Race in American Politics, p. 395] “Black’s history of slavery and discrimination has encouraged them to evaluate policies [and, presumably, give sermons about them] based on their perceived impact on the racial group.” [Ibid]

Thus, Mr. Hannity, it appears that you and many other whites have misconstrued the “in-group bias” of Rev. Wright’s church to be “out-group animus.” Could it be that “out-group animus” is the only racial attitude you understand?

As most of us know, African-Americans suffered the abomination of slavery for nearly 250 years. And, in order to justify that abomination, slave-owning whites fabricated and spread the BIG LIE about the innate inferiority of blacks. The BIG LIE even gained the support of respectable scientists, such as the polygenist, Louis Agassiz. (“Indeed, the Nazis were distinctly influenced by American racial thought.” [Blum, p. 4]) But, more significantly, “No respectable scientist challenged the idea of race and its corollary, white supremacy, until the early decades of the twentieth century.” [Blum, p. 126]

Thus, blacks were widely viewed to be senseless brutes and often abused as such, especially in the South. Consequently, nothing prohibited America’s slaves from being ruthlessly exploited to generate enormous excess wealth for undeserving white Americans.

But even worse than such antebellum suffering and exploitation was the totalitarian system of racism that gripped the South for nearly another century. Called Jim Crow, it was a system of segregation, continued economic exploitation, KKK ascendance, lynch mob terrorism and racial cleansings “that emptied entire counties” of black residents.

For example, during 1912 in Forsyth County, Georgia, “more than a thousand people – 97 percent of the county’s black population — were driven out over a period of about two months. They owned 1,900 acres of farmland, nearly all of which they were forced to sell or abandon. The county’s five black churches were burned.” [Elliot Jaspin, Buried in the Bitter Waters: The Hidden History of Racial Cleansing in America, p. 4]. Such racial cleansings occurred repeatedly from the period of Reconstruction up to the 1920s.

Thus, as you can see Mr. Hannity, even this brief introduction to “Racism 101″ — which has yet to address the Cracker-inspired Affirmative Action for whites and “symbolic racism” that would prevail in America during the second half of the twentieth century — would provide solid justification for Rev. Wright’s words: “God Damn America.”

Moreover, were Americans to watch the actual sermon containing Rev. Wright’s seemingly unpatriotic and inflammatory words, they would find that he was contrasting the unwavering love and justice of God against the immorality of governments – governments from the days of the Roman Empire to the present-day United States of America. What Christian would dispute that?

Thus, Rev. Wright talked about the injustices suffered by African-American slaves prior to Abraham Lincoln. Then, he added: “But I stop by to tell you tonight that governments change.”

Rev. Wright then contrasted the good U.S governments of Harry Truman and Bill Clinton with the poor government of George W. Bush, but only to deliver his main point: “Where governments change, God doesn’t change.”

At that point, Rev. Wright asked his congregation to turn to Malachi 3:6, which reads: “For I am the Lord, and I change not.” He then proceeded to interpret that passage as follows: “God was against slavery on yesterday, and God, who does not change, is still against slavery today. God was a God of love yesterday, and God who does not change is still a God of love today. God was a God of justice on yesterday, and God who does not change, is still a God of justice today.”

Noting, “governments fail,” Rev. Wright then proclaimed the failures of the Roman, British, Russian, Japanese and German empires — before returning his attention to America’s failures:

“And the United States of America government, when it came to treating her citizens of Indian [Native American] descent, she failed. She put them on reservations.”

“When it came to putting her citizens of Japanese descent fairly, she failed. She put them in internment prison camps.”

“When it came to putting the citizens of African descent fairly, America failed. She put them in chains. The government put them on slave quarters. Put them on auction blocks. Put them in cotton fields. Put them in inferior schools. Put them in substandard housing. Put them in scientific experiments. Put them in the lower paying jobs. Put them outside the equal protection of the law. Kept them out of their racist bastions of higher education, and locked them into positions of hopelessness and helplessness.”

“The government gives them the drugs, builds bigger prisons, passes a three strike law and then wants us to sing God Bless America. Naw, naw, naw. Not God Bless America. God Damn America! That’s in the Bible. For killing innocent people. God Damn America for treating us citizens as less than human. God Damn America as long as she tries to act like she is God and she is Supreme.”

“The United States government has failed the vast majority of her citizens of African descent.”

So, Mr. Hannity, does Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s sermon sound more reasonable to you, now that you’ve read Part One of my “Racism 101,” and now that you’ve read his words in context?

I must confess that I doubt God gives a damn about the fate of any country. But most Christians, including the Christians in Rev. Wright’s church and all of America’s Christian Zionists, believe God does. In fact, many Christians believe that God will damn America if it fails to defend Israel. Thus, applying these widespread Christian beliefs, I fail to see what’s so objectionable about Rev. Wright’s sermon?

That being the case, I suggest, Mr. Hannity, that you dispense with your hate mongering against Rev. Wright and, by extension, Senator Obama.

And you, Senator Clinton, should know better than to equate Rev. Wright’s comments with those of Don Imus. I suggest you read Lawrence Blum’s book, “I’m Not a Racist, But�”, especially his thoughts about the “moral asymmetries in racism.”

Although Blum discusses four specific moral asymmetries, you would be well advised to memorize the following: “Some forms of racism are central and paradigmatic, others are secondary. The former have defined for us what racism is. They are tied to the rationale�for the intense moral opprobrium carried by the term ‘racism.’ That rationale involved oppression, hatred, and discrimination against people of color, and most especially blacks and Native Americans, by whites, not the reverse. Everything else being equal, greater moral opprobrium rightly attaches to racism by whites against people of color than the reverse. This is the most important moral asymmetry in racism.” [pp. 43-44]

Finally, Senator Obama, you need to dispense with your politically motivated distancing from Rev, Wright’s forthright condemnation of American racism. Instead, recall the wise words of Mark Twain: “Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it.” Or, better yet, consider that, just days prior to his assassination, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. called his mother to tell her that his next sermon would be titled: “Why America May Go to Hell.”

Finally, before the three of you persist in your respective hate-mongering, racial triangulation and political retreat, consider the immortal words that Thomas Jefferson wrote about the morally debilitating impact of slavery: “Can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with his wrath? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just: that his justice cannot sleep for ever . . ..”

Wasn’t Thomas Jefferson suggesting that a just God would damn America?

Walter C. Uhler is an independent scholar and freelance writer whose work has been published in numerous publications, including Dissident Voice, The Nation, the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, the Journal of Military History, the Moscow Times and the San Francisco Chronicle. He also is President of the Russian-American International Studies Association (RAISA). He can be reached at: waltuhler@aol.com. Read other articles by Walter C., or visit Walter C.'s website.

19 comments on this article so far ...

Comments RSS feed

  1. dorrett said on March 31st, 2008 at 5:51am #

    Great article. This should be posted on as much site as possible and will help many Americans in trying to understand the Pastor Wright’s saga!!

  2. OBAMA NOT WRIGHT said on March 31st, 2008 at 6:03am #

    Democrats NEED Clinton to stay in the race. OBAMA IS UNELECTABLE IN GENERAL ELECTION. “Obama marched with Farrakhan”Obama’s Pastor Slurs Italians in Latest Magazine (CNSNews.com) Wright continues his Obama supported attacks on non-blacks now slurring Italians in issue of Trumpet Newsmag. Wright states, Jesus enemies had their opinion, Italians looked down their garlic noses at the Galileans, and Jesus death on a cross was a public lynching Italian style! This government runs everything from the White House to the schoolhouse, from the Capitol to the KKKlan of white supremacy who is clearly in charge. Every issue published Wright’s rant against white people in which he covers a world that is controlled by white supremacy, a country that’s on its way to hell in a hand basket because of lying politicians, in a culture that still thinks ‘white is right! He said young African-American Christians are more concerned about ‘bling bling’ than about freeing their minds and still Obama says I could no more disown him than I could disown the black community. According to his federal income tax return for 2006, Obama gave the Trinity United church $22,500 in contributions. Trumpet Newsmagazine started 80s, Wright is CEO and Wright’s daughter, Jeri Wright, is the publisher. Requests for comments Obama camp of course not answered. Trumpet Nov/Dec edition, featured Louis Farrakhan, recipient of the Lifetime Achievement “Dr. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. Trumpeter” award. Farrakhan has called Judaism a “gutter religion” and said Jews are “bloodsuckers. Many of the biased cable news pundits try to make viewers believe Obama’s speech limited damage of Wright controversy, but the general election will show voters strongly disagree, especially non-black voters. Obama refuses to explain to the public why he would have someone as such a close spiritual advisor and mentor and why he would expose two young daughters to such hatefulness against fellow Americans. The problem Wright’s comments are not theological views, but political statements. This is a serious issue for Obama in general election. As with each new utterance on the topic of Reverend Wright, Barack Obama confirms his own moral obliviousness and he seems to have disdain for those who are troubled by his own unwillingness to break with Wright, even worse Obama still insists Wright is a brilliant man, So brilliant, apparently, that he has uncovered the plot by white America to kill African Americans, so insightful to perceive the 9/11 attacks caused by American terrorism and his discerning observation Israel is a “dirty” word, and still in Obama’s eyes, Wright is brilliant. This, we are told by biased cable news pundits like CNN Obamaphiles, is not supposed to affect voters’ view of Obama’s judgment. Perhaps voters are embarrassed to tell pollsters they are privately offended. General election Republicans as well as independents and democrats are irked by this moral obtuseness even though media like CNN or Hardball cover it up with bogus Clinton attacks.

  3. Hue Longer said on March 31st, 2008 at 6:07am #

    Oh no…here comes the angry “what about my pain”? “progressives”—thinking that all slavery is equal. “Get off my porch blackie, I’m talking about MY pain! Waa wa waaa, we’re all purple and have suffered, wa waa wa, stop looking worse off and bringing up my privilege! waa wa waa”!

  4. Betty said on March 31st, 2008 at 6:31am #

    Mr. Uhler do you consider the writings of Wright pertaining to Italian’s to be an ok thing to say or write as well.
    Is it OK for Jerry to spew what ever he wants in what ever form he wants??
    Slavery was a very long time ago.
    It was a very disturbing time in our history but is no longer a basis or reason for any actions any one takes.
    Are we as adults to blame what our ancestors did for everything we endure in life??
    BO would not be where he is today if America did not offer the same opportunities to all.
    Bos wife would not have the career mansion or bank acct she posseses
    if America did not offer the same opportunity for all
    The Clinton campaign has not pushed the race issue BO has just in a sly enough way that most dont see it.
    Sean Hannity who can be stubborn was stubborn enough to one one of the first to dare to expose BO as most of the media were afraid to do it considering the fact that they would be called racist
    Any one who has an opinion of BO that isn’t full of hope and praise is considered a racist .
    The difference in yourself and Mr Hannity is that he has no problem reporting on Hillary as well as BO you on the other hand just want to write neg on Hillary and any one who doesn’t think BO and his mentor are the next coming.
    So Wright should not be compared to that of Imus??
    Is that because BO had harsh words for Imus yet plays cupcake with Wright??
    Imus apologised for his words Wright on the other hand has not
    Bo claims Wright is sorry and I suppose we are suppose to take his word for it?
    It is clear that you have vowed your loyalty to Bo which is entirely your choice but dont talk down to those who dont share your praise.
    It is not a sin or a crime to not support BO , Wright, and his views
    I can not support Clinton McCain and that is no big deal to anyone yet if I dont support Bo it is some kind of sin according to you and his followers.
    Is he not running for president and should be investigated just like anyone else would be??

  5. Ryan said on March 31st, 2008 at 7:29am #

    Agree with Betty and there’s no excuse for an pastor, preacher, et al standing at the front of a house of worship in the US, addressing a congregation and calling on a higher power to damn the country. When that’s not grasped, forget whether you agree with Wright or not, the left makes itself look stupid and I’m stuck interpreting to my own friends. Walter, you wasted everyone’s time.
    We get it, you’re voting for Barack.
    Now quit wasting people’s time and write about something that matters.
    Telling Dissident Voice readers that it’s no big deal is leaving all of us living in a vacuum. Quit treating us like we’re stupid. Wright offended a lot of people and it has nothing to do with racism.

  6. David said on March 31st, 2008 at 7:43am #

    Walter Uhler – Thanks for the great article. We need more calm measured voices like yours surrounding this difficult topic.

    Betty – did you even read the article? Try engaging the arguments of the author rather than making up what you think the argument is. So, slavery was a long time ago and “Are we as adults to blame what our ancestors did for everything we endure in life??” Can you also support that logical extension of that, that any privilege gained from our ancestors is also to be relinquished? Come to grips with that and you’ll move your understanding of this issue off your narrow minded viewpoint.

  7. hp said on March 31st, 2008 at 10:22am #

    Yes Betty, expand your viewpoint. Take a peek at the legacy the Germans have inherited for, well, forever. For their crime of having been born German.
    Though there are practically no Germans alive who perpetrated or participated in WWII, this does not matter. The Germans, in toto, are eternally condemned and sentenced to a purgatory of never being forgiven or relieved of ‘their’ past. It will be, and is, perfectly acceptable to commit hateful acts against them, slander them and their future progeny, with ‘them’ having no defense of ‘their’ indefensible crimes possible. It would be, and is, easier to protest against God than it is to even think of protesting against their sentence of eternal guilt accompanied by eternal extortion. Notice the author of this article uses the ‘Nazi’ club? How sweet is not just revenge, but profitable revenge.
    And you Betty, are just as guilty, whether you know it or not. Ignorance of your crimes by birth is no excuse. Nobody cares about your losing your job, your house, your health care. Nobody cares about your racist kids either. You deserve it all for your being born white in America. You bastard!
    Of course you can always ‘cure’ yourself with a heavy dose of self flagellation and knee bending submission to your moral betters. And you know who they are, don’t you? Well, don’t worry about that. They’ll remind you. They’ll remind you plenty.

  8. Gary Lapon said on March 31st, 2008 at 10:28am #

    David makes a good point…if everyone were to get a fair shot, you’d have to take away the inheritance of whites whose fortunes can be traced to slavery, and have compensation for blacks whose ancestors were not compensated for their labor and were therefore unable to pass the money and benefits (access to education education, decent living standards, etc.) down to their ancestors.

    And what about black people, many of whom are still in their forties, who grew up under Jim Crow? Did they get a “fair shot”?

    And finally, if, as Bettty and Ryan write, everyone gets the same opportunities in the US and the actions of our ancestors have no bearing on those of us alive today, why do blacks suffer from higher rates of incarceration and poverty? Unless you admit that systemic racism is alive and well in the US today, the only option left is to assume that blacks are somehow inherently inferior to whites. Thinking that makes one a racist.

    The situation is really that simple. Either you admit racism exists or, because of the stark evidence of racial inequality, you admit to being racist. Wright was on point if you actually look at what he said in context.

  9. Gary Lapon said on March 31st, 2008 at 10:39am #

    P.S. hp, Wright does not hate all white people or think all whites are racist, nor does he advocate separatism. In fact, his church is a part of the United Church of Christ, which nationwide is primarily white.

    This is a good article putting all the nonsense about Wright in perspective:
    http://www.socialistworker.org/2008-1/667/667_03_Wright.shtml

  10. ron said on March 31st, 2008 at 10:56am #

    Great article.

  11. hp said on March 31st, 2008 at 11:57am #

    Impossible as it may seem, I not only support Wright’s right to speak but also Wright’s basic premise. I also have a great deal of respect for Mr. Farrakan. Please just don’t require me to.
    Gary, thanks for your even remarks to me. I appreciate it and respect you for this.

    P.S. It’s nice to know this black minister of God does not hate all white people. Having worked at a seminary for more than two decades, I can assure you a vast majority of white ministers do not hate all black people.

  12. rosemarie jackowski said on March 31st, 2008 at 12:40pm #

    I also agree with Rev. Wright’s major premise. And I also have a lot of respect for Rev. Farrakan. They both make me want to go to church.
    If Obama had supported his pastor, I would have a lot more respect for him. I guess I’ll just have to vote for Nader. Nader’s policies are a lot more helpful to blacks and whites than Obama’s are.

  13. Max Shields said on March 31st, 2008 at 2:30pm #

    rosemarie jackowski, “Nader’s policies are a lot more helpful to blacks and whites than Obama’s are.”

    thank you!
    Max (:

  14. Tyler Frost said on March 31st, 2008 at 8:01pm #

    Here is yet another assanine article that argues for a double standard and defends racist retoric originating from African Americans and condemns even the slightest suggestion of racial prejudice when it comes from whites. There will never be true equality in this country until the majority of people, from races white, black, yellow and brown are willing to come clean and hold themselves to the same standard. Until this happens every racial group will have what they feel is a justification for racial bias and hatred. Hillary Clintons comparison of Rev. Wright with Imus was indeed weak. Wright is many times worse. He is not a radio satirest, he is a preacher whose words are taken seriously by his followers and just because he is black doesn’t mean he should be immune to the same standards by which we define racism. The notion that “white supremacy” controls this country is being vanquished as we speak by the overwhelming poularity of Obama with both black and white folks. If anything the success of Obama should be feared among the proponents of the “disenfranchised black” paradigm. His success may bring an end to the myth of oppression and put the focus on the black community itself and its remarkable failure to take personal responsibility for anything. The white community should be held equally in contempt for its passive acceptance of the accusations heaped upon them and their subsequent demonization for the injustices of the past. A vast majority of white Americans have NO past connection to slavery or the Klan, have no more economic privilage or opportunity then blacks, and have the same political influence as any other member of another racial group. Until professional victims like Walter Uhler and their bogus publications like Dissident Voice admit that most of us Americans are in the same boat, no matter what color, then their will be no racial harmony. Only the divide and conquer propaganda disguised as “the struggle for peace and social justice” (yea right) when they instigate anything but that.

  15. Eric said on April 1st, 2008 at 9:11am #

    “[until we see that] most of us Americans are in the same boat, no matter what color, then their will be no racial harmony.”

    That was exactly the point that Obama made in his speech in which he condemned Wright’s rhetoric.

    So why is everybody jumping on Obama when he agrees with your position?

    Speaking as a white person, the fact that so many whites still don’t take responsibility for the war on drugs which was used to disempower the black community while creating a new “punishment industry” the prisons, is telling. Whites abuse drugs as much as blacks, so why are there far more blacks doing time? The only possible answer is continuing racism.

    I don’t believe in a sky god who either blesses or damns, but given the history, there is a lot to answer for, as Wright points out. He doesn’t have to judge White America, its actions are self condemnatory, whether it is racial discrimination against Africans or ethnic cleansing and genocide of native Americans or mass slaughters in Vietnam or many other countries and now in Iraq.

    Martin Luther King said “the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today is my country”.
    It was true then and it is true now. And yet a vast swath of the public thinks that America’s behavior should result in God’s blessing. Highly doubtful. What comes around really does go around.

    I doubt I would vote for Obama, despite what I regarded as a speech appealing to all Americans to show some spiritual maturity and see that we are all in this together (except for bush’s base, the haves and the have mores).

    His equivocal stand regarding the war and his having the same tired old warmonger advisors makes him unlikely to really “change” anything.

    But please don’t equate him with his pastor, even though his pastor’s remarks should be reflected upon sincerely by his detractors. Judge not Wright lest ye be judged. Remember that one?
    Good advice.
    Our best teachers are sometimes those who challenge us when they hurt or feelings. Wright urged people at the close of his sermon to look within, and stop blaming the Arabs for 911. If we are ever going to figure out “why they hate us”, whether it is African Americans, Native Americans, or anybody else, we need to know and take responsibility for our own history of hatred. Until that happens the cycle of sorrow and mistrust will continue.

  16. Hue Longer said on April 2nd, 2008 at 1:57am #

    I forgot who did the recent DV piece, but he/she said that the rest of the world would probably vote for Wright if they were allowed to vote. That point is true and it’s funny to watch angry white progressives lay out the rules of dissidence. So ironic for some “progressives” to call out mainstream Democrats for being ivory tower *unts.

  17. johnthetreehugger said on April 2nd, 2008 at 6:52am #

    to all y’all who think you have no connection or responsibility for this nations past crimes:

    sorry, but your wrong. This nation and its immense wealth was built (read: stolen) by killing native americans, enslaving africans, and indenturing poor whites from europe. You would not be here today, living on your land, if our ancestors had not slaughtered the original owners and driven them off. The very basis of life in this country was aquired by theft and murder. You can delude yourself with the fantasy that its not your problem, but you would not be here today if not for that theft and murder. And the profits from those historical “developments” are what built up the government, built up capitalist enterprises (for even more so-called development), built up huge charitable enterprises from philanthropy (from bloated rich people), built institutions of higher learning and of course paid for more wars to aquire more wealth. Come on, its easy to see how Spain and England plundered the “New World” of gold to build their empires. Why is it so difficult to see that Americans did the same?

    What’s this got to do with me, you might ask. Well the first step of an adict and/or abuser is too admit there is a problem. So please stop living an ahistorical fantasy of disconnection and admit that our collective wealth was built on the backs of Native Americans, African slaves, poor whites, and a lot of women (who did a hell of a lot of work for little or no money). Is it too hard to conceptualize how the profits of plunder made their way down through time from individuals to business to government to institutions to infrastructure?

    Now, i’ll be the first to admit, i’m actually not sure how to address all of that. Obviously, we need a national dialogue on how to deal with our problems and change society for the better.

    But i am sick and tired of all of you “good americans” screaming and whining about people pointing out the historical realities of how this country was formed and gained power and wealth. It is the blunt reality of our shared history. Deal with it and learn from it.

    Why do you hate America? some will ask. gimme a break. I wouldn’t be here if I didn’t love the place and see potential for it. Just because someone – Wright or me or whomever – criticizes past historical actions and/or current policy doesn’t mean we hate the joint. In fact, I think our criticism stems from love of country and love of fellow citizens and the desire for truth and justice to really develop for all.

  18. hp said on April 2nd, 2008 at 10:32am #

    “We all killed Jesus.”
    Mel Gibson

    “Bullshit Mel.”
    hp

  19. Adam said on April 5th, 2008 at 2:59pm #

    from http://timwise.org/ :

    The history of this nation for folks of color, was for generations, nothing less than an intergenerational hate crime, one in which 9/11s were woven into the fabric of everyday life: hundreds of thousands of the enslaved who died from the conditions of their bondage; thousands more who were lynched (as many as 10,000 in the first few years after the Civil War, according to testimony in the Congressional Record at the time); millions of indigenous persons wiped off the face of the Earth. No, to some, the horror of 9/11 was not new. To some it was not on that day that “everything changed.” To some, everything changed four hundred years ago, when that first ship landed at what would become Jamestown. To some, everything changed when their ancestors were forced into the hulls of slave ships at Goree Island and brought to a strange land as chattel. To some, everything changed when they were run out of Northern Mexico, only to watch it become the Southwest United States, thanks to a war of annihilation initiated by the U.S. government. To some, being on the receiving end of terrorism has been a way of life. Until recently it was absolutely normal in fact.