Black Liberation Theology on Hannity’s America

last night, Sean Hannity had a segment regarding Black Liberation Theology on Hannity’s America.

This segment was extremely eye opening and raises some very interesting questions.

Everyone should view this program to get a perspective on what this so-called theology is all about.

View the entire segment in the following video clip:


More Rev. Eugene Rivers on Hannity’s America

Last night, Sean Hannity had Eugene Rivers on Hannity’s America.

Reverend Rivers gave more enlightening insight into the psyche of Jeremiah Wright and what he perceives is the position of Black Liberation Theology within the realm of the black religeous experience in America.

I don’t think it passed anyone’s attention that Jeremiah Wright was claiming earlier this week that an attack on him was an attack on black churches. Reverend Rivers would pointedly argue this message.

Having lived in the South all of my life, I was finding it hard to imagine that a philosophy as aggressive and hostile as Wright’s would go unnoticed in the various communities in which I’ve lived and suspected that Wright’s brand of Christianity was simply an abberation of the black community specifically attributed to places where people like Wright held influence.

I think it’s unfortunate that so many black leaders, and especially religeous leaders, feel that they have to “circle the wagons” for someone like Wright. Frankly, he isn’t worth it and they should exercise more selective judgment.

View the entire interview done last night, Friday 5/2/2008, on the following clip:

Jeremiah Wright: “Barack said what he had to say.”

Previews of Jeremiah Wright’s interview with Bill Moyer are now hitting the media.

A quote attributed to Reverend Wright is, “Barack Obama said what he had to say as a politician.”


How many people can remember that TV show, “What’s My Line”? Will the real Barack Obama please stand up?

When are we going to stop getting a politician’s lip service from Barack? The answer might well be “never” or “not before the general election” since he may know that the vast majority of Americans may not like what they hear.

Barack Obama wants campaigning to be about the issues. Well, the American public would like for the campaign to be about the issues also. But, they also want the person presenting the issues to be someone that that can trust regardless of his or her stand on the issues. If the candidate isn’t well known to the public then the character of the candidate becomes an issue … like it or not.

What the American public … or that part of the American public that hasn’t bought Barack Obama hook, line and sinker … wants to know is, “Can they trust Barack Obama to be a man of his word?” It’s the old “in your ear” analogy. It may sound good, but can you believe it?

Well, according to Jeremiah Wright, Barack Obama says what he needs to say to get elected President. So. Don’t all candidates? Sure. But, it’s a fact that you can trust some more than others … and … if you can’t completely trust them, or what they say … usually the candidate has enough of a track record that you can predict where they’re coming from. Basically, Hillary Clinton is an known quantity. You may not believe everything she says, but you have a good idea of where she’s coming from. The same applies to John McCain.

Barack Obama is a different matter. Several months ago, I actually preferred him over Hillary Clinton. Then I realized I knew next to nothing about him. I decided to start looking beyond the hype and what he’s written about himself and what he says he wants to do for the country. And, quite frankly, the more I learned , the less I liked and the more questions I had.

One comment he made a while back kept coming back to haunt me. Speaking on religion, he said that he had finally found a form of Christianity that he was comfortable with and that was in Reverend Wright’s church.

That form of Christianity is Black Liberation Theology. One of its fundamental concepts is that God is black and supports the oppressed black people against their oppressor, the white race and, if God isn’t black and doesn’t support the black people in overthrowing their oppressor, then God doesn’t exist.

According to the individuals who developed the concept of Black Liberation Theology like James Hal Cone, by their own admission, it is strongly based in Marxism.

James Hal Cone – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

One thing I’ve noticed about people with marxist tendencies, people like Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez, is that they have no qualms about distorting the truth or frankly lying to achieve their goals. I forgot. That short list also includes Jeremiah Wright and may, in fact, include Barack Obama. It can explain his fudging on questions, contradictions, mis-statements, phraseology,associations and evasiveness in general.

If you read some of Karl Marx’s writings from the time that he was a journalist in London, his choice of words are no different from those of Black Liberation theologists including Jeremiah Wright himself and James Hal cone who Wright frequently alludes to. By Barack’s own admission, this form of Christianity is his “comfort zone” and occasionally slips out … “typical white people”, oppression, etc.

It’s an interesting thought. Barack Obama might actually become the first Marxist president of the United States.

Obama, “Out fo Context” … Again

Any time Barack Obama sticks his size fourteen or so foot in his mouth and people begin making a clamor against his apparent elitist and narcissitic attitude, his faux pas are always excused as being taken “out of context”. It’s beginning to happen frequently enough, that some might be coming to the conclusion that Barack Obama isn’t necessarily being taken out of context, but that he’s simply “out of touch” with many, if not most, Americans.

Barack Obama may consider himself an expert on foreign affairs, but his ” left handed” treatment of rural Pennsylvanians and the approximately 70% of the American population who fall under his “typical white person” comment would make any African or Arab recoil in horror shouting “mon dieu”.

It’s becoming increasingly apparent that being born in Hawaii, having a father from Kenya, spending a significant part of his childhood in Indonesia, attending prep school in Hawaii, as well as attending Columbia University and Harvard Law School and then living in South Chicago and adopting a radical ideology called Black Liberation Theology, even though it may make an individual feel intellectually superior to his fellow Americans and a self proclaimed foreign policy expert, it doesn’t necessarily make him in any way knowledgeable about or understanding of average Americans.

Barack Obama, as he has repeatedly asserted in Pennsylvania, considers himself a “constitutional” lawyer. A person has to remember that he studied constitutional law at Harvard Law School which is the birthplace of humanistic law rather than law according to Blackstone or a Judeo-Christian basis for law which was the context of the law within which our forefathers wrote the Constitution. His view of the second amendment won’t necessarily be what the founding fathers might have intended because he will consider their intentions simply irrelevant in today’s world, therefore subject to a “humanistic, progressive or modern interpretation”.

For Barack Obama, anyone considering it their constitutional right to own firearms are more alien to his view of the world than little green men from Mars. He can only see them as “embittered” because what rational person would want to own firearms in Barack’s world.

Naturally, Barack sees rural people who are religeous as “embittered”. The form of Christianity that Barack has embraced, Black Liberation Theology, states, that “if God isn’t black and doesn’t support the victimized and oppressed black race against its oppressor, the white race, then God doesn’t exist.” It’s an ideology based more in Marxism and racism than the Bible.

Barack Obama is an ardent supporter of illegal immigration and illegal immigrants. He stated during the Texas primary that America should be bilingual. All students should have to learn and be fluent in two languages meaning the second, if not first, language should be Spanish. I’ve studied three languages besides English, but I still expect to speak English when I walk out my front door. My expecting that, according to Barack Obama, makes me “bitter”. Expecting the government to enforce immigration laws is being “bitter”. Barack doesn’t believe that one of the first duties of a country to protect its sovereignty is to control the people that enter it. So, anyone who expects the government to enforce its laws is being xenophobic and bitter.

Barack Obama doesn’t get it that Americans as descendents of immigrants don’t oppose immigration but do oppose illegal immigration. He also doesn’t understand that most Americans also believe that, as their ancestors did, immigrants coming to this country should adopt or at least respect the language, customs and laws of the country they have entered.

Even Americans in rural America understand that trade with other countries is vital to this country’s economy. Rural Americans understand that government policy toward corporations and industry can do as much to drive jobs away from America as any free trade policy. They also understand that the free trade policy can be used as an extension of national security policy and may question why Democrats in general oppose a free trade agreement with a small South American country like Columbia who has been a staunch ally of the United States against Marxist or leftist regimes in Venezuela and Ecuador while being silent about agreements with Communist China or a corrupt Mexican government.

Barack Obama just doesn’t get it so it’s understandable that he thinks that people living in rural Pennsylvania are “embittered”. But, people in rural Pennsylvania really aren’t any different from average people most everywhere else in America. They don’t need his skewered assessment based on his limited knowledge of Americans derived from his Hawaii prep school, or Columbia University or Harvard Law School education or his experience limited to working in South Chicago or his religion based on a paranoia and Marxism.

The Democratic pundits who are Obama supporters are now trying their best to devise a new series of smoke and mirrors to detract from Obama’s latest blunder. Fortunately or unfortunately, depending on your perspective and philosophy, each blunder gives us a more intimate view of the real Barack Obama and a better idea of what he actually means by “change”.

Slowly but surely, all of these “out of context” comments by Barack Obama are giving us a true picture of the candidate that we will be able to eventually put together into an accurate and more complete context of the man.

Bingo!!!! Ideology versus Theology

I knew something was stinking up the woodpile but I couldn’t quite put my finger on it. Then I ran across this post:


This is a must read for anyone trying to figure out what’s going on … and everyone should read it.

Basically, Barack Obama is Jeremiah Wright, just pulled out of the gutters of south Chicago and dressed in an Ivy League suit, cleaned up to be more palatable to moderate Americans.

This Black Liberation “Theology” is about a foreign to Christianity as Islam is. It’s no small wonder that Louis Farakan received an award from Wright’s church.

Wright is somehow justified because he “does good” in south Chicago. Well, Hesbollah and Hamas are praised for “doing good” in Lebanon and Gaza strip. If you buy one, you buy the other.

Barack Obama would love to make this about black versus white, the “oppressed” versus the perceived “priveleged” … turning the race card to his own advantage, inciting a type of social warfare … which he’s done, so far, fairly effectively.

Somehow, I get the feeling that American democracy hasn’t been so threatened internally since demagogues like William Jennings Bryan, Huey Long or Joe McCarthy. Each had their own political era and message, but the intent was just the same. No, I’d go further than that. He smells a little of Fidel Castro wooing the middle class in Cuba or even Hugo Chavez in Venezuela.

I’m curious as to how gullible the American public really is and am beginning to appreciate the precarious success of FDR against the likes of Huey Long in the 1930’s, basically a “moderate” populist against a demagogue.

The funny thing is that Bill Clinton has met his master, someone who can sweet talk the public better than he did for eight years. And, now that they’re in competition per his surrogate, Hillary, the same crowd that threw roses at his feet in adulation are now feeding him to the lions.

All hail Barack, the new master!!

And the sycophants are falling at his feet; ergo, Bill Richardson!