I Hate White People

Lee, you should have included a barf alert!

sorry. it’s not really possible to sufficiently warn people properly.

Wow! Um… so young conservative white males are using the language of urban black youth to get their message out? How awesome is that! LOL!QT

Please tell me that was parody.Please.No one could possibly be that lame unless they were doing it on purpose.

Didn’t they rip this off from SNL’s “Dick in a Box” Video.

I hear a Butthead witticism intone in my brain:”Uuuuuhhhh… Is this like… a joke?”

Okay its official. White folks are starting to really scare me. Starting tomorrow I’ll be crossing the street and clutching my purse when I see 2 or more white boys in suits coming my way.

Hey, your posts have inspired me! – I love the way you directly get to the point, and then work outwards. I’ve been trying to do figure out what I want to say about ,that would allow me to do exactly the same thing.

From the YouTube Page of this video:{Quote}”Young Cons is not attempting to force their religious beliefs onto anyone, but rather encourage discussion among the American youth. They do not claim to have all the right answers, but merely try to express their views through music. Their goal is not to pursue a rap career, but rather get young Americans involved in politics.Young Conservatives is a group with a devout mission to spread the love and logic surrounding true conservatism. Our greatest enemy lies in the lack of understanding of the conservative movement.” {End Quote}I guess they are serious with that video. I thought it was a parody. I even thought their web site was a parody until I read the YouTube info.@ QueenTiye who wrote:”Wow! Um… so young conservative white males are using the language of urban black youth to get their message out? How awesome is that! LOL!”I’m shaking my head (along with you) in disbelief.To quote The Bob Cesca(TM)(C):Keep going, Republicans! You’re doing great!

I am literally stunned.”My views are rock solid, no chance you can break me.”White yuppies in blazers rapping conservative Jesus hynotizin’ zero tax God stomp.There’s something so very wrong here I can’t get my head around it. Many things. It’s too wrong.It’s like the time I saw three extraordinary white men and three incredibly white women, all wearing their own body weight in hair spray, singing “Swing Low, Sweet Chariot” accompanied by Lawrence Welk on the accordian.Don’t these boys have anyone who loves them enough to sit them down and explain that maybe they should reconsider this?/Go Conservatives!

You tink that was good wait until they hit you with the remix featuring Diddy

And everyone thought Michale Steel was nuts.The man’s a visionary I tell ya.It’s all part of his plan.We are all just squirrels trying to get a nut.Michael S. Steele. – Visionary

Neocon automatons. Incapable of original thought.Wake me up when they have an original thought and not just a knockoff of some liberal’s idea with the message changed to their brand of dogma.

Ping! My gaydar just went off! It’ll take years, but eventually these boys will figure it out (especially the short one), lose their anger (and their shirts), and live happy gay lives. Maybe in Seattle!

phil, I think you’re right, because I’m 100% positive that the second guy from this “Young Cons” video is also the second guy in this video.

No seriously, guys – I like this. I mean, for one thing, I’m not entirely adverse to their message. I’m quite a bit adverse to their missing facts, but that’s something different. They are young Christians – and I think it is well worth a discussion amongst conservatives whether Christian = Conservative (and amongst Christians, the same dialogue), but having said that, I’m not opposed to their ideology, so long as they are open to sincere dialogue.In the meanwhile – I’m impressed with the mainstreaming of urban black culture. It says something that what has been a “subculture” movement has become embraced by those who least would have embraced it before. Whether we can appreciate this on an ideological level or not – socially, I’m inclined to watch this with some interest.True story: back in the 80s, the Christian right spent quite a lot of time lecturing black folks on how we were getting Christianity all wrong. (I was Christian at the time.) The Jim and Tammy Bakers, and such RARELY had any of the leading black artists on. In Brooklyn, where I grew up, the Assemblies of God church “Brooklyn Tabernacle” was the ‘hipster’ church – the one where you could go for a real pentacostal religious experience, without having to get dressed up for church – and this was considered more spiritual than all the focus on what clothes you wore to church, etc. Brooklyn Tabernacle had a 100 voice choir, interracial, multiethnic, and frequently singing black gospel (but sounding very controlled and “white” while doing it…) Still, in their huge theater of a church, the acoustics helped tremendously and the audience singing along and praying in tongues would be a pretty powerful experience. Everyone would nod knowingly about “Tuesday nights” at “the Tab.”For all of that – they NEVER would invite any black artists. The Winans? Forget it. The Hawkins Family? Not on your life. The racism was there, but you couldn’t talk about it, because that would be racist…At the same time, Pastor Freddie Price was a televangelist who never could stay on tv – we in the black community suspected racism and noted how he was never really welcome with the rest of the televangelist crew.Fast forward to the 90s, and what do we have? TD Jakes, with his own megachurch, is often a guest now on these shows. Creflo Dollar (yes, that’s really the name he goes by….and his ministry is largely about creating a flow of dollars for himself… but I digress) hangs hard with Kenneth Copeland. Etc. From the outside looking in, it STILL looks like the black preachers and musicians are being treated like stepchildren in the movement, but at least they are there. And Pastor Jakes is someone Obama calls upon for prayer.In short, the elevation out of the disdained status of any aspect of black culture is something I always watch with interest. It usually means expanded opportunity for black folks.QT

@ QTConservative is the default option for the Fundies.If one takes Leviticus and Deuteronomy even remotely literally, it is then politically impossible to embrace the fundamental planks in the Liberal platform – civil rights, eliminate DADT, abortion rights, separation of church and state…It’s not so much, perhaps, that Christian = Conservative, but that Christian != Liberal.

Right – but taking Leviticus and Deuteronomy literally is not a requirement of Christianity. Even if you DO take it literally, the fact that most of what is written there is abrogated early in the Book of Acts means that that standard is easily refuted as a Christian one. Which is why lots of Christians are watching President Obama warily, but with active interest. I think most thinking Christians, even evangelical ones, have a healthy skepticism of the marriage of religion and politics – especially conservative politics.. and I say “especially” not as a repudiation, but as a caution for what happens when you put all your eggs in one basket.QT

@ QTThere are those who say that Christian faith is a broad spectrum encompassing everything from young earth creationist / fundamental literalists to….ummm…more open minded sorts who see scripture as instructive parable (a position I don’t care for – saying one is a X-tian ought to mean something more than “If I pray, when I pray, I address Jesus”).Nothing is abrogated. According to their own Holy Book (which is certainly short on quotes from the Messiah), JC himself said “Not one word of the law shall change…”IMO, too few of the faithful walk with Christ, while far too many hide behind him for cover.I don’t believe Obama, despite his public assertions, possesses any sort of strong faith…although I am straying off topic here (wtf was the point?)…nor do the milksop pick-n-choosers, who would be secular if it weren’t for the social pressures and the all too human need for a crutch.In any case, I think there is a fundamental conflict between Liberal politics and Christian theology that the Republicans TRY to exploit (Yay!), and the Democrats DO exploit by shutting the fuck up about the bible as a source of policy.If there are any secular sorts in the GOP, they can never admit it…and it’s tough to sell a program when you’re running a front even to your cohorts.

cousinavi: Fortunately, people don’t have to consult with you to know what they believe. Jesus’s words have to be taken in context of the whole bible, or else we don’t need to have a bible. Apostle Paul spends quite a lot of the New Testament explaining why gentiles don’t have to follow jewish law, and Peter’s dream in book of Acts (I think) confirms Paul’s understanding that the law doesn’t apply. The majority Christian understanding (last I checked) is that anyone under the covenant of Christ is under the law of Christ, and anyone under the covenant of Moses (i.e., the Jews) are under the law of Moses. This isn’t cherry-picking – it’s what is dictated by the New Testament. Indeed, here is Apostle Paul on the subject:

5:1 Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.5:2 Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing.5:3 For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law.5:4 Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.5:5 For we through the Spirit wait for the hope of righteousness by faith.(King James Bible, Galatians)

In other words – adherence to the old testament law directly contradicts following Christ.As to Obama’s faith, I would have to argue that that is between his heart and the Heart of God, and you don’t get to judge. I could say, based on Obama’s espoused intentions, that he’s secretly Baha’i, and only doesn’t proclaim that because Baha’is can’t run for elective office, and also because he’d lose the election being other than Christian. But that would be me imposing my beliefs on him, instead of letting him articulate for himself who he is, and what he believes. And it’s fundamentally disrespectful.QT

@ QTThanks for quoting the bible and utterly making my point.With all due respect, relying on selected bits of scripture plucked from a twisted book of contradictions and fantasy in order to support the idea that the book, itself, is capable of backing divergent and inherently contradictory interpretations doesn’t advance your position.As for consulting me to in order to know what one believes, at least I have a certain degree of consistency going for me.Jesus, meek and mild, threatening me with eternal hellfire because I’m circumcised AND eat lobster…and why? Because he loves me so.Or is that Paul making the threat?Either way, the “majority” of Christians isn’t an argument for either the truth of the interpretation, much less its justice, fairness or reason.

cousinavi: Inasmuch as you do not seem to espouse a faith, I’m only pointing out that what you decide is Christianity doesn’t make it Christianity. Religion is not a series of logical rules – it is a series of beliefs held together by faith. Just because you want to hold Christians accountable for Leviticus to make your point doesn’t make that Christianity. And if the majority of Christians understand their theology one way, then I think that’s their religion and those of us on the outside of it have to deal with the religion on ITS terms, and not on ours. I think your atheism (if you are atheist) can hold up in face of accepting that Christians believe what they believe, and not what you think they should.When in fact I argue the justice, fairness or reason of any faith other than my own, do let me know. All I’m doing here is defending against your seemingly arbitrary pronouncement that if people don’t handle Christianity according to rules that never were really a part of the faith, that they actually don’t believe in Christianity. THAT seems more than unreasonable – it seems illogical. I don’t think one can argue that I don’t really believe in God simply because I don’t believe in the God you manufactured in your own head. The best we can agree to is that I don’t believe in the God you manufactured.As to your interpretation of that particular passage – it almost entirely misses the point of the scripture. The point of the scripture isn’t to condemn people for being circumcised OR eating lobster – it’s to condemn people for being Christian and then thinking that being circumcised is still a requirement of God, while not also assuming the full responsibility of the old testament law (i.e., not eating lobster). In short – it’s arguing against cherry picking! If one got circumcised because one liked that ‘look’ better, rather than as a condition of being “right with God” – then there is no condemnation.Once again – I’m not defending Christians, although I have to defend Christianity to the best of my ability. Moreso, for the purposes of this conversation – I’m defending the principle of tolerance.QT