"Lord, ...we ask you to help us work for that day when...white will embrace what is right."
Rev. Lowery's benediction and closing prayer for US President Barack Hussein Obama's inauguration is a gentle reminder to all you racist whities out there that you must turn from your bigoted ways and
"make choices on the side of love, not hate; on the side of inclusion, not exclusion; tolerance, not intolerance".
Please listen, reflect and learn.

Whites have already embraced what you say is right. But. unfortunately it appears to be wrong. Every multi-cultural country is on the verge of collapse.

"Every multi-cultural country is on the verge of collapse?"

Does that mean the end of the world is near?

We've heard all those doom sayings before.

Every big city park has soap boxes - where speakers
pour out their proclamations.

To each his own...

I heard President Obama's Inaugural speech.
And it was awesome! It illustrated a different
mind-set from that of his predecessors. It spoke of
unity and hope. And the future. It did not speak
of division or of finger-pointing, or of old
hatreds. But of ideals and values and moving forward.
Where anything is possible...

We all must embrace what is right. We all must do the
right thing. For we all share this beautiful planet
together, and its survival depends on us. Whether we
choose to live in peace or destruction. The choice is
ours to make, and collectively we can do it.

After watching the newly elected President, I believed
in what he said. Once people no longer take their world
for granted, but instead understand the social
authorship of their lives and futures, they can become
an irresistible force in history.

Truthnow: "Every multi-cultural country is on the verge of collapse"

Good heavens! We'll all be roooooooooooooooooooooned!

I thought about dignifying these hysterics with a well thought out answer, but decided it just wasn't worth it. Foxy, you're far more patient than I.

Truthnow, wait for a sunny day then go for a walk in a park. Have a lie-down and just relax.
Don't worry, I sincerely doubt you'll be mugged, beaten and raped by multiculturalist sympathizers.

I agree with TRUTHNOW78 “Whites have already embraced what you say is right.”

As many as choose to, just as non-white support for ‘what is right’ is less than unanimous.

It is a stupid notion for anyone to insist the values of another group of folk is determined by their ethnicity.

It is as reasonable for Rev. Lowery's benediction and closing prayer to declare “"Lord, ...we ask you to help us work for that day when...white will embrace what is right."

As it is for the KKK to expect people of color to embrace the back seats of buses and embrace different water fountains.

Such attitudes both work to stall the poursuit of harmonious tolerance and both are worthy of criticism.

Actually, one issue I would take up with any American. Just about every government form I saw when I lived there required the member of the public completing it to nominate their race (Caucasian, African American, Hispanic, Occidental, Native American etc).

Part of the reasoning was some folk were entitled to soft loans from government. When I filled mine in I put “Australian” and was told we were just an extention of “Caucasian” and as such, me also being “Male” rated at the bottom of the Affirmative action ratings.

Not that I could give a rats about affirmative action, it is a crock of lies but the point to make is

So long as government insists on asking questions of a person’s ethnicity, the differences and divisions based on ethnicity are reinforced.

I find it remarkably refreshing that we do follow the same practices here, excepting for Aboriginals and Torres Strait Islanders and I live in the hope that maybe one day we will rectify that anomoly.

Anyone who knows anything about Africa will laugh at Rev. Lowery's benediction. The blacks are totally intolerant of those less or more black. We see that also among our own aboriginal tribes. Hopefully all will be more tolerant although I suggest Rev Lowery take the plank out of his own peoples eyes before praying for the splinter to come out of others.

KMB, there is plenty to celebrate today. Obama may well revitalise the great Republics ideal that 'all men are created equal' for many americans; and judging by the general reaction give hope for many around the world.

No need for your dog turd on the dinner setting today.

President Obama put it so well:

"Today I say to you that the challenges we face are real.
They are serious and they are many. They will not be met
easily or in a short span of time. But know this...they
will be met.

On this day, we gather because we have chosen hope over
fear, unity of purpose over conflict and discord.

On this day, we come to proclaim an end to the petty
grievances and false promises, the recriminations
and worn out dogmas, that for far too long have strangled
our politics.

We remain a young nation, but in the words of scripture,
the time has come to set aside childish things. The time
has come to reaffirm our enduring spirit; to choose
our better history; to carry forward that precious
gift, that noble idea, passed on from generation to
generation: the God-given promise that all are equal,
all are free, and all deserve to pursue their full
measure of happiness...

What the cynics fail to understand is that the ground has
shifted beneath them - that the stale ...arguments that
have consumed us for so long no longer apply..."

I can't help but wonder what the point of this thread
happens to be? I cringed at the divisive term "whities"
which KMB used in his opening post. That's not very subtle,
or clever. Was his intention
to incite a reaction from posters, and to what end?
More division and vitriol?

Well folks, don't bite into it.

It demeans you!

"So long as government insists on asking questions of a person’s ethnicity, the differences and divisions based on ethnicity are reinforced."
--Posted by Col Rouge, Wednesday, 21 January 2009 2:20:07 PM

Well put Col.

Those who ask you to identify your race are the problem, not the solution.

To believe otherwise shows you also believe that all victims of a criminal attack after enduring the slow legal system, then must accept such attacks are allowed to continue as a precondition for their receiving "victim's compensation".

Supporters, promoters and practitioners of racial discrimination must be frustrated at inauguration of President Obama with his loud, clear rejection of their failed racial separatist ideology.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/20/us/politics/20text-obama.html?em=&pagewanted=all

.

well said Foxy, and so much more polite than me

<< Anyone who knows anything about Africa will laugh at Rev. Lowery's benediction. The blacks are totally intolerant of those less or more black. >>

Oh, runner. So much Christian love in your heart. Sometimes I wonder if you're not really Jesus posting under a pseudomyn.

And I'm sure you know lots about Africa. I am frequently dazzled by by the breadth of your knowledge and your ability to navigate through complex issues with an open mind and an eye always on solutions.

Sancho

You obviously get truth mixed up with love. Love actually demands you face up to truth which you seem to happily pick and choose.

Dear runner,

Have you actually read the transcript of
Rev. Lowry's speech?

He did not single out
white people, he actually spoke about black,
red, yellow, brown, and white, asking for
racial harmony.

Here is just a small portion of what he said:

"...With your hands of power and your heart of love,
help us now Lord, to work for that day when nations
shall not lift up sword against nations, when tanks will
be beaten into tractors, when every man and every woman
shall sit under his or her own vine and fig tree and
none shall be afraid, when justice will roll down like
waters and righteousness as a mighty stream.

Lord in the memory of all the Saints who from their labors
rest, and in the joy of a new beginning, we ask you to help
us work for that day when black will not be asked to get in
back, when brown can stick around, when yellow will be mellow,
when the red man can get ahead, man, and when white will embrace
what is right. That all those who do justice and love
mercy say AMEN."

AUDIENCE: AMEN!

(APPLAUSE).

Take Care,

When you consider the fact that only 20 percent of the world's population is white - Rev. Lowery's benediction takes on another perspective altogether. White racism, indeed any racism, has no place in a modern world.

Dear Rainier,

That was exactly the point that Rev. Lowry
was making.

Glad you get it!

KMB,

I dont think we have ever seen USA or the world 'more united'.
I am delighted.

The only one who seems to have a problem is 'you.'
Col Rouge has put it as it is=

*It is a stupid notion for anyone to insist the values of another group of folk is determined by their ethnicity.*

Kenya where his father was born tied a cow down by its four legs and slaughtered it SLOWLY without stunning to party.

I hope the TV shots of that world wide doesnt pass our New President by.
Without compassion for animals 'all' people are nothing .

May God Bless America and its new President as we work to build better understanding world wide.

PS Just as a foot note KMB especially for you.

I can tell you we work with aborioginal people and some times they we tell you - We No wanna work with White people.

On The Gold Coast we had arranged to pay for a 95acrs property with buildings stables restruants and turn it into a aboriginal and main stream Agriculture UNI

Do you know the local agency said on the Gold Coast representing Aborignal people

No thanks not interested we dont want to work with white folk!
So theres a lot of healing to come.
Lets hope todays choice of President turns out to be the right one.
What a big job he has.

Foxy,
“Have you actually (understood) the transcript of Rev. Lowry's (sic) speech?”
The mere fact that Rev. Lowery mentions black, brown, yellow, red and white in his prayer does not imply balance in what he said.
“black will not be asked to get in back” evokes black victim, white oppressor.
“white (must) embrace what is right” evokes black victim and white oppressor who still hasn’t done the right thing.
Rev. Lowery would have been specially selected by Obama to deliver his closing prayer. His words would also have been carefully vetted. As Obama did not criticise Lowery’s choice of words it is reasonable to assume that he endorses them. This assumption is reinforced by Obama’s decades-long association with radical black liberation theologists such as Rev. Jeremiah Wright and Louis Farrakhan, relationships which were only (publicly) disavowed when they became a threat to Obama’s presidential candidacy.
If George W. Bush’s proxy had said “Blacks must get off their backs” or “Black man must stop dealing crack, man” there would have been calls for impeachment. Yet these statements would be no different in essence to Lowery’s “white (must) embrace what is right.” The only difference exists in the liberal/progressive mind where “victims” have special dispensation to make such racist statements whereas “oppressors” are damned if they highlight the obvious hypocrisy

Foxy and KMB,

Sorry to say it but I too think that is purposely insulting white people, who in the majority are not racist. It says the black and red can now be uplifted some how and the white can now have a new beginning and embrace what is right as if white hasn’t been doing so, it singles out white and possibly yellow as needing to be mellow… In any sense it is a either a malicious or stupid comment for such an occasion.

At best Lowery is a stupid agitator, at worst a serious racist. I’m sure his intellect is in tact and it wasn’t an innocent mistake, it’s provocative and bloody foolish. Even a bad speech writer would know the potential hostility that can be read into that comment. I am sorry but it is vile after a majority white country just voted in a black, not just vile to whites but to all decent people in general. It is a sad warning for the possible flavour of this groundbreaking presidency that the entry into the job is smeared with such utter carelessness and racist comments.

I wish ALL racists (black brown white and yellow)luck with their issues. I think most white people are very decent.

Foxy,
You may well be right with your analysis of what Rev Lowery was saying but if many Americans come up with the same interpretation as KMB, it illustrates just how difficult the Presidents job will be. In less than 24 hours he is being criticized for something somebody else said.

No matter what he does, he will be accused by some who are suspicious of his intentions and on the other hand he will be accused by others for abandoning them if unrealistic expectations are not met.

I wish him every success in the job, but boy is he up against it.

I agree with merediths summation of the reverends speech.

Poorly chosen words for what should have been a crowning moment.

Anyone who enters into debate on the basis of skin colour has already acted with discrimination. It is the same basis of wether one has brown eyes or blue eyes, blonde or brunette hair. It is a natural genetic characteristic that cannot be changed. The logic of his statement could read "may all the brown eyed people see the truth".

Perhaps he ought to have a talk to his creator and realise his ignorance of genetic design. While the identity of colour is mentioned America will continue to be socially fractured. Prayers on the basis of generalisations may please some but fail to impress the Lord of all the Earth, who designed colour and gave intellectual giftedness to man.

I certainly hope that Obama is going to be a president who is black, & not a black president. That would be a disaster for the US.

Thanks CR!

Banjo,
It's totally reasonable to hold him (and his machine, people, what ever term you want to call it) to account for the opening speeches.

Sure, he will be dammed just as GWB was constantly.

He doesn't have super hero status cuz he's black for me. He is just another bloke in a job as far as I am concerned. He will affect my world so I care, I will have no problems appreciating things I think are good from him either.

TRUTHNOW78,have just read all your comments,like it or not it smells and for sure,your idiotic last comment proofs it to be so,also would you be so kind and show or backup.your last comment

KMB,

I too believe you have raised a valid point and agree with Meredith's post on 21 January 2009 at 8:51:20 PM. That type of racism reflects poorly on Obama and he is accountable for it. That said I am happy to crystal ball gaze that the media will not raise the issue.

Hopefully Obama will do a better job in the future. I view it squarely as a performance issue rather than a specific racist issue for Obama. I would find it strange if Obama himself was racist barring rather extreme sexism which is not evident. His mum is white.

meredith,
I appreciate your comments.

I addressed my comments to foxy as i recall her being in raptures about Obana's election win (She even received a return email from him)

I tend to be far more restrained and it is not appropriate at this stage to say 'I told you so' but reasonable to point out the perils of the job. The President, although having a lot of power, is not a one man band. The whole of government has a say in all policy. You may recall Bush having to ask the Congress for more funds for various things.

Frankly after the last 12 months of the US election on every night news here, I am quite sick of it as we are not America. Our media just load us with 'news' they get for nothing. I did not watch the incoming ceremony.

I have seen quite a few US Presidents come and go and I have not noticed a lot of difference in any of them. Republican or Democrat, so why should this one be different?

Sorry Banjo, I didn't realsie that was a response and not a postition.

Yes, I am sick of it too Banjo, the freaking Obamasiah stuff on TV each night, and yeh, I agree, it would be a hard burden to carry... expected to save the world, and in that sense too, I have been feeling sorry for the guy. I dislike the Dems beliefs though.

I was a GWB supporter and he took good steps with racism, having black people in high office, like Mr Powell and Ms Rice, no one ever gives him credit on race though.

Anyway we do live in interesting times, hey :)...

Rev. Joseph Lowery would be horrified that
his comments have offended some people.
That wasn't his intention at all. He has
spent his entire life struggling to make
equality a reality for all. He was a leader
in the American Civil Rights Movement.

He was born in Alabama 87 years ago.
We can't even begin to imagine what he has
endured and witnessed (let alone his parents
and grandparents). The words that some people
are focusing on are actually part of a larger
speech and were delivered lightly. It was an
altogether fitting conclusion to a historic
day from someone who has been there from
the start.

Listen to the Reverend again with a softer heart.
Perhaps you may realize that what he's actually
preaching is racial harmony not bigotry.

Cheers.

Foxy,
Unfortunately the Rev was not inclusive of all peoples in reconciling the past, but spoke derogatory of "whites" asuming white means you are not right. He used generalities not specifics is an attempt to be impressive and poetic to his hearers, rather than honest and holy in a prayer to our God.

Agreed, I know it is nice to have hope and so forth but not at the cost of ignoring something nasty that could not possibly have been a mistake.

I can understand black people disliking white people too, there is a lot of racism everywhere, but this is no way to fix it.

Also though, there will be goodness to come from Mr Obama's time in power for sure.

Sorry folks, I don't see things the way
you do. To me Rev. Lowery's entire speech
was beautiful and soaring, anything but
divisive, and as I said before, altogether
a fitting conclusion to a historic day from
someone who has been there from the start.

Racial harmony was the way I read his
message.

And I believe in it with all of my heart.

I have nothing more to say.

You believe whatever you want.

All The Best,

Yeah, I second that Foxy.

I'd ask you - how many of you, really believe the goal of the Reverend was to be divisive, instead of inclusive?

For many of these matters, I've got to wonder if the intent is ignored in favour of scoring points via semantics.

Can you point me to other speeches by the Reverend where he has specifically shown to have racist views? Has he stooped to using the term 'whitie' like certain posters here who are trying to exaggerate or distort the issue?

I'm not in favour of preferential or prejudicial racial treatment for any group. Despite these comments I don't think the Reverend or Obama is either, though if anyone can prove otherwise then I'll listen. In lieu of that, I've got to assume this is petty point-scoring.

For a start why are you guys so under the impression that Mr Obama and his team of people are 100% perfect?

TRTL,
All the people that heard it, read it, and can bear to admit it, I think believe it.

I'm not going to go hunt up this blokes speeches to prove anything, this one in discussion is ample.

Why is a racist comment ignored? As KMB recently mentioned, if it were Mr Bush saying blacks need to pick it up a bit, you'd be really upset I am sure.

Unfortunately it happened, face it.

Foxy,
I think there was a lot of goodness in that speech, but like any talk:

"I love you, I love you, I love you, I love you, but I hate you too."

Just because a majority of it is positive doesn't mean the one bad bit doesn't have some measure of meaning. It isn't erased. It alters the meaning somewhat too.

Basically Mr Obama and his team said whites have been somewhat in the wrong.

They said it, not me.

Anyway I am not going to keep going on either, we simply disagree, which isn't the end of the world.

The election of President Obama has the potential to actually divide the country more along racial lines similar to the OJ Simpson case. Where OJ could not be guilty of murder in the eyes of black people just because he was a black hero and so any genuine criticism of Obamas policies by white people will be seen as a white plot.

KMB - Do you think none of the other races he mentioned are bigoted and racist.
What about the war in the Congo at the moment, the old flare up of the Rwandan tribal massacre. Then there is also the Sudan massacres in Africa. I bet if you study the history books you’ll find lots more too.

The red and yellow races have their own bloody histories of mass slaughter too.

Rev. Lowrys freudian slip in singling out only the whites as doing wrong shows the belief that many races seem to have that it is only a white failing, when a look into their own history which they often refuse to acknowledge shows worse massacres than what they accuse the whites of.

Racism is not really about skin colour it is about bloodline and even the tribe next door as was witnessed in Rwanda is subject to land and rescource hostility if there is no intermarriage between the two.

The conflict of skin colour is not going to go away just because Obama now heads the White House. If you read the Code of Hamarrubi in about 2000 BC, you would realise they were gloating over their victory over the whites from the North. Human nature being what it is has not changed because the leader of the majority has changed by skin colour in America. The conflict identified by skin colour in the hearts of many still remains, and not only in whites. Are the blacks claiming because of Obamas skin colour some dominance over the whites? If so the colour problem still remains. Are they celebrating his skin colour or his ability to lead America for all?

Here's a Darwinian angle on racial prejudice

“[Drs Cosmides and Tooby] argue that modern racial discrimination is an overstimulated response to what might be called an “alliance” detector in the human brain. In a world where the largest social unit [was] the tribe, clan or what-you-will of a few hundred people, your neighbours and your other allies will normally look a lot like you, and act similarly. However... neighbouring tribes [were] often hostile.

There would thus be a biological advantage in tribal branding, as it were. Potential allies would quickly identify what marked them out from others, and what marked others out from them—and, because those differences would probably be small, the detector would need to be very sensitive.

In the past, such markers would often have been cultural, since local physical differences would have been minimal.

A telling instance is recorded in the Bible:

'Then said they unto him, Say now Shibboleth: and he said Sibboleth: for he could not frame to pronounce it right. Then they took him and slew him.'

The questioners were the Gileadites. The slain, an Ephraimite. But no physical difference could distinguish the tribes, so the Gileadite ethnic-cleansers had to rely on linguistic tics.

In a world where a syllable can get you killed, having differently coloured skin is a pretty strong brand of identity.

However, it is not a unique signal. Experiments... conducted in both America and Brazil (another racially mixed country) suggest it is surprisingly easy to rebrand even people of different skin colour by making other badges of allegiance more significant—as happens when sportsmen clothe themselves in coloured team shirts.

Moreover, [Penner Irvine and Saperstein] have shown that perception of a person’s race can actually change in the real world. Many people shift from being “white” to “black”, in both their own eyes and the eyes of others, in response to unemployment, impoverishment or imprisonment.”

http://www.economist.com/science/displaystory.cfm?story_id=12795581

So while the cause may simply be a set of our evolved responses, the solution remains in our own hands.

Meredith “For a start why are you guys so under the impression that Mr Obama and his team of people are 100% perfect?”

Agree

I note Barrack has already started to sell down his previous promises and suggest the current circumstances will not allow for the entire political agenda to be fulfilled.

The expectations of some form of Obama lead evangelical revival are doomed to end in a crash, just like most US Democratic presidencies have been found coming up short.

Although, I wish him well in his presidency, he has a hell of a job on, the consequence of Jimmy Carters "Community Reinvestment Act".

Runner,
I think you are off the mark trying to justify the existence of coloured "difference" and racial intolerance anywhere.
Australian Aboriginal people enjoy tribal differences of language and ownership of their unique estates but generally they respect the protocols required for communication and passage .

Not so for us whitefellas. "Unique World Heritage Rock Art - let's bulldose it into a heap and build a gas plant! ".

After all , there is still plenty left !

No runner, being white is not necessarily right .

We are still evolving .

Hopefully Obama, or Barry to some, will evolve us one helleva a lot more .

kartiya jim you write

No where did I ever imply that 'white was right'. I did imply that often blacks are more racist than those they accuse of being racist. If they looked into their own prejudices they would be a lot better off. Mr Obama is very fortunate he is in the USA where dare I say many whites have given him an opportunity to be the first African American President.

If he lived in Nigeria he is likely to receive far more racism than he would of encountered in the USA.

I think you are speaking out of ignorance if you have not observed the squabbles and sometimes violence between tribes and family groups of our own indigeneous people. It is quite likely that many will put their hands up for royalties if the gas plant goes ahead. That will create more family squabbles.

Runner ,
Of course you're right and to save any possibility of unholy squabbles, we will bar the Blacks [of any shade ] from any royalties that may be legally available and make our white lives and theirs, a bit less stressfull .

you can hate yourself all you like Jim, but don't dump it on white people... sorry most of us don't hate ourselves... get some help man.

Fascinating discussion, in which KMB's original distortion of Rev Lowery's speech has provided a soapbox from which many of OLO's closet racists can spout their bile.

Which is undoubtedly what KMB intended. Well done.

CJ
Where are the racists?

People in this are string deeply opposed to Loweries racism, and racism in general, even Foxy and Examinator &co while supporting the speech are not doing so in a racist manner, it is just their belief it doesn't mean what others think it does

Meredith,
I am not "dumping" , as you put it on all whites ,just some .

For that matter racists of any colour and religious fundamentalists anywhere are a blight on people's lives in many countries.

My guess is the good Reverend Lowery was simply reminding us of the hurdles that have been placed in front of some people because of the colour of their skin or with other differences by whites by those with power.

As you are a supporter of George Bush you may well be in for a few sleepless nights as Barak tries his best to help the World as he sees it .

- And I don't hate myself , you or anyone else who's opinions,ways and means I don't often agree with - there is no good to come of that particular emotion .

The American People that elected Obama have shown the best of their political system -interesting times .

No problem Jim,

I am glad you hate racism. It might be worth it to call it when it happens though, imagine a white president having such comments in his opening ceremony...

*As Obama did not criticise Lowery’s choice of words it is reasonable to assume that he endorses them.*

Err I think you are way overanalsying all this. The whole thing
was actually pretty boring until the last few lines, when everyone
started laughing, including me.

Obama is intellectually far beyond all this stuff. Lets face
it, instinctively and genetically speaking, humans are tribal
by nature, but we can think beyond that.

No matter where you look, racism/tribalism happens. Go to Africa
for instance, they treat pygmies like slaves, yet in the next
breathe with complain about the white man.

Obama is way beyond tribalism in is thinking. That is exactly why
he could turn around and appoint Hillary as his Secretary of State
or start working with McCain, despite the fact that those two spent
months slinging mud at him.

That is exactly why I see him as a bright light and why he
shows good judgement. He is not a slave to his emotions, as
was George for instance.

Yabby,

No one is trying to say Mr Obama should be perfect, I think the more down to earth of us are completely agreed there is racism from all colours of people. The "whites are the racists" myth is pretty much dead.

What is so unbelievable is that he'd ok a racist jab on such a momentous occasion... It's not some superior intellect that made him do that, it's a racist remark, it's not a smart thing. No glorifying the potential good he or his team may do will make that remark ok.

It's not irrational at all to question it... it's actually more irrational not to question it.

No one is saying he is all bad, but it's the people saying he is all 100% perfect that is the freaky part.

*What is so unbelievable is that he'd ok a racist jab on such a momentous occasion... *

Once again, I think you are overanalysing this. I certainly did
not see it as a racist remark. I'd say he had to find a word
that rhymed with white and the word right came to mind.

Why should Obama vet and agree with every word that others
speak? He is a tolerant fellow after all.

Nobody is saying that he is 100% perfect, in fact he himself
admits that he will make mistakes. The good news is that he
is a frigging lot brighter then the dummie whom he has replaced
and I would say that is great news for everyone!

My initial reaction to the wording was strong disapointment.

That was in part influenced by the wording of the opening post of this thread. I decided to try and put some context around the words used by Lowery.

Rev Lowery has lived through the times when the white majority definately did not do right. Times when the black would have to get to the back (or go elsewhere). He has spent most of his life campainging for the day when blacks would have the same opportunities as whites.

The wording he used is based around a song that's been important to the civil rights movement for a long time and he has reportedly used those words often in public addresses. From what I can see Rev Lowery has been a key figure in the civil rights movement for a long time. His involvment would appear to have a high level of symbolic importance to those who have fought a very real campaign to try and get equal rights.

I hope the words he used belong in the past, I heartened by those I see who have taken Obama's election as a sign that race no longer need hold them back.

I wish that Lowery had changed his words for the day, that his words had been thanks that the day had come rather than an old battle cry but I can also cut him some slack given how much he has seen of the times when white has not done right.

Hopefully that closed a chapter in American history. It's time for all to move on from the racial beliefs of the past.

R0bert

Rob...no amount of history or personal anecdote will redeem Lowery's RACIST comment about whites embracing RIGHT.

The attributes attached to all other racial groups were either neutral or non accusative. His connection of 'right' with 'white' was racist in the extreme.. and just shows that those yelling loudest about 'You pack of racists' usually are just as racist themselves ...or.. one might call them 'cupboard' racists just waiting for the altered power structure which will allow them to 'come out'.

If he had said that in Australia.. he would be up before the HREOC before you could say 'Sambo'.

*His connection of 'right' with 'white' was racist in the extreme..*

Ah, poor BD, you sensitive little petal you :)

David is all bothered by Lowery (a fellow christain's comment) against a group that David happens to belong to but was unwilling to rebuke other christains who made false accusations against posters on OLO by accusing some of being paedophiles.

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=2360#52565

Enough said.

R0bert

Yabby :) Sensitive Petal ? ...... me ?

Wellll...err.. yeah.. of course I'm sensitive to blatant racism against white people... (or any race) and especially sensitive about it when it is in the CONTEXT of a Presidential inauguration where we are singled out for 'special' verbal treatment of a morally derogatory nature, where the values attached to the other 'races' were either neutral or positive. And this... as the WHOLE WORLD is watching!

Just IMAGINE if he had said something like "Whites stay mighty, blacks embrace their slavery"

Robert.. ur whining.....

meredith asks "Where are the racists?"

What I said was "closet racists", and you're one of them. You're in good company here, with others who obtusely try and infer some kind of racist meaning to the old Reverend's speech.

To its very great credit, the predominantly "white" American electorate has elected a "black" President - something which would have been unthinkable 50 years ago. In so doing, they have once again set a shining example for the rest of the world. Of course, the many racists who now feel disenfranchised aren't happy about it, and project their own unreconstructed prejudice in mealy-mouthed, mean-spirited accusations of reverse racism.

We have lots of them here at OLO, but they generally try and disguise their inherent racism in disingenuous claims of egalitarianism - which was of course the old Hansonite strategy that found way too much support in our own electorate.

I see that PorkyBoaz is still using his sock puppet identity to spout the same drivel he always does. Is this the demise of Porkycrap, or will he morph into another idiotic alias, but instantly recognisable as the same deranged old bigot?

No I'm not.. That's typical of the thinking that can only call people names and only cope by defending their outmoded thinking at any cost... calling me racist is hilarious, I am so just not racist.

This thinking seems to have only one argument, and that is to jump into any situation and call people racist, even when it's not about race somehow.

This is a solid complaint... that was a really off thing to say in the speeches.

Do you realise your blind defense of it, simply because these guys are black is the actual racism... I know if I were in a minority I would not want a reactive and abusive name caller trying to help me

meredith "That's typical of the thinking that can only call people names and only cope by defending their outmoded thinking at any cost... calling me racist is hilarious, I am so just not racist. "

I am sure you are not, nor am I but CJMoron (as he is affectionately known) is well known for his low-level pursuit of the pointless.

Just consider him a bit like foot-fungus, easily resolved by application of some cheap over-the-counter medication and easiest avoided by watching where you step.

Of course, what distinguishes closet racists from more honest bigots is that they insist they are "so just not racist". Dear old Col's another one - like I said, OLO's full of them.

The Kind Reverend Lowery simply reminds us about what has been the attitude of white to black in America and those would be Christians are immediately on the predictable defensive .

What is wrong with a gentle reminder ?

Nothing !

Heed the non racist message - that's all .

*where we are singled out for 'special' verbal treatment of a morally derogatory nature,*

Whew Boazy, clearly far too sensitive a little petal it seems :)

Everyone present started laughing at the last few lines,
me included, but you clearly cannot be helped to see the big picture
here.

But if you want to make an issue out of it, sure, it can be argued
that in the US, the overwhelming racism has been by whites towards
blacks. There are good reasons why so many blacks were crying
tears of joy at Obama's inauguration. Let them have their moment.

Obama certainly is not racist, he is intellectually far beyond
that and could well have a great effect on uniting people, rather
then diving them.

Now, get over it, you poor little sensitive thinggy :)

meredith,
I don't remember commenting on the Rev's speech.
Yet you presumptuously lump me with others. Not that I mind being lumped in with people as generous of spirit as Foxy. As for the “Co” I’m intrigued as to who you mean. I’m reasonably sure that any one of them would be able to point to any number of substantial differences making lumping a perilously inaccurate undertaking.

I think you’ll find that in other posts I said your COMMENTS appeared or were racist. There is a whole world of difference! I also suggested that you do more research and think about the consequences of your pronouncements. Your post was proof of that.

I respond to you as a person not as some artificial ideological stereotype. I think it fair that you do the same for me. It isn’t that I’m thin skinned (sensitive) it is just that there is far too much assumptive nonsense which has such a limiting effect on discussions.

As a point of fact I would be curious where you got your figures from that says Americans are predominately not racist?

Racism and prejudice is rampant virtually institutionalized in many US states.

I also don’t believe that the rev’s speech offended those who are genuinely not racist.
Those that voted for the toxic shrub and his insidious cohorts’ (read their articles on the American Institute web site dated prior to coming into power.) replacement are those who feel they’ve lost something and are resentful (read some of their web sites).

As for the rev’s speech it’s self, it was in a context and as such not being an American and an amount of emancipated elation is understandable.

Personally, I was under whelmed by its rhetoric (same ole same ole) and predicable hype. I wait to see what Obama does before passing judgement.
I also remember other white presidential speeches with similar contexts from way back.

PS I don’t fit any stereo typical mould.

Examinator,

All I said was I said you believed it meant something different to me. No need to have a heart attack.

I believe white people are in the majority very decent, so deal with it...

Also me and a lot of others think that racist line was a really off thing to say... That you guys can't handle that says pretty sad stuff about your beliefs in freedom not mine.

Just a gentle reminder... Racism is racism, and your sticking up for it.

Col,
Thanks for that support... Seems, I may have tipped a few tempers here.

PS, Examinator,

One thing in your post really sticks out to me:

" I also don’t believe that the rev’s speech offended those who are genuinely not racist. "

Do white people have no right to offense?

Why are we meant to take rude little racist hits on the chin when other colours aren't expected to put up with it?

Don't you think that is racist in itself

Meredith “Col, Thanks for that support... Seems, I may have tipped a few tempers here.”
You are most welcome.

On the topic of racism, you will find racists project their insecurities and see “racism” in the views of reasonable folk whilst falsely claiming to interpret from others the very thing they are actually “closeted” about.

Conversely, real people, like you and I, are sufficiently whole as to not jump to such conclusions simply because someone expresses a view which does not pander to the expectations fixated on by the 'politically correct'.

btw, Examinator has told me too, how virtuous he is.

Examinator,

Your right actually you hadn't posted in this string and I confused you with TRTL, which I do a bit, and I'm sorry for that.

You've posted now though and put forth opinions and when I said I thought you weren't supporting the speech in a racist manner, sadly I was wrong too, your quite clear that you think whites are the most racist... even when they vote a black man in as their Pres.

Anyway I'll be out of posts after this... So have a think about judging all colours equally and best of luck with it

Meredith,
No heart attack, no anger… It’s a pity you don’t read what is written, think, plan your response rather than scan and react. As evidenced by the several bites at answering me. None of which showed any sign that you either read or understood what I was saying.

I did NOT say whites are more racist than blacks. My guess is that it would be about the 6 of one ½ dozen of the other.

I DID challenge your assertions that whites were predominantly non racist and white racism is “outmoded thinking.” You then added in your response “I believe” that I would accept.

I DID point out that racism is virtually institutionalized in many states which is demonstrably so. See Florida et al electoral role, the strategic placement of booths etc. Mississippi ignoring white on black violence. KKK , Aryan Nation et al.

I said " I also don’t believe that the rev’s speech offended those who are genuinely not racist. " you answered
Do white people have no right to offense? ( I think you mean offence as in offended) Yes but logically or grammatically that doesn’t relate to my statement unless you’re asking if racist whites have a right to be offended. Then the answer is more complex.

You said “Why are WE (my emphasis) meant to take rude little racist hits on the chin when other colours aren't expected to put up with it?”
No that would be unfair.
However if you’re not racist or frightened that you might be, you would automatically assume it was directed to someone else who was and therefore my statement holds.
The “we” intrigues me? You’re not an American. I therefore surmise your offence is emotional/ideological motivated .

Then you said “Don't you think that is racist in itself?”. Logically No that would be unfair. In context I don’t accept that the comment was racist.

I suggest we leave it as that we agree to disagree no biggy

meredith: << I believe white people are in the majority very decent, so deal with it... >>

If poor meredith had omitted the "white" bit, it would go a long way to support her claim not to be racist.

<< Why are we meant to take rude little racist hits on the chin when other colours aren't expected to put up with it? >>

I don't supppose the angry little dear has any idea of how much racist ideology is contained in that sad question. Like I said, completely in the closet.

A final tip: if you've got Col Rouge supporting you, it's a pretty good indication that you've abandoned the world of universal human rights, understanding and mutual respect. If you walk like a duck, talk like a duck, and keep the company of ducks... etc.

You closet racists quack me up.

Examinator,

Glad your not having a heart attack there’s not enough posts in the day for that if these big complex posts are you being calm.

“We” is white, there are white people all over the world not just America.

That was a racist comment towards white people. It is not a mistake a presidential speech level writer would make either it was intentional. Many white people will be offended. Simple.

Examinator, you said, “However if you’re not racist or frightened that you might be, you would automatically assume it was directed to someone else who was and therefore my statement holds.”

You can’t be serious that if one reacts to an accusation of racism one is guilty?

You’re a good debater, because your wordy. I feel you could well claim victory by some mistake over phrasing etc where as the real matters… the racist comment will fall by the wayside, lost to a technical point, or distracted on some lesser side issue .

I have sat on this thread because the assumption that it’s ok to call white people racist or bigoted etc is one of my utter most pet hates … Is this pet hate guilt in your eyes? I have basically just refuted any defence of the racist comment and stuck up for whites.

I agree it is different values and ways of thinking in general and pointless to try and change each other.

CJ
The reference to white is from Lowrie not me.

Closet racists? I think that's just a chance to be abusive and name call for you... What ever criteria you have for racism in your brain doesn’t make sense to me or many others.

I'm not going to respond to you again, until I see some actual ideas and comprehension beyond name calling

The conclusion to Reverend Lowry's speech was a simple rhyme (poetic licence?) - I don't understand why any white would find anything in it to be offended.

"Lord, in the memory of all the saints who from their labors rest, and in the joy of a new beginning, we ask you to help us work for that day when black will not be asked to get in back...
when brown can stick around...
when yellow will be mellow....
when the red man can get ahead, man...
and when white will embrace what is right.
Let all those who do justice and love mercy say amen."

Sheesh, where are all the 'yellow' people complaining about being told to chill out?

Major storm in thimble, people. More important issues to discuss like achieving a sustainable economy.

Fractelle,
For a Christian man who stands for reconciliation to place value judgments on people based on the colour of their skin and deliberately reconstruct emotive past issuse that divided America is not wisdom. He should have been representing all Americans with new hope and unity; as has Obama. Instead he preferred to identify colour difference and place value judgments on people based in their colour. This is not a small matter as far as American history is concerned, he incited difference, rather than unify all peoples in a future with hope. Of course most White Americans will not be offended, but it gives Blacks a verbal taunt to use gainst Whites, "Whites are not right".

Philo

You, as a christian, are very judgemental.

I deliberately quoted the entire rhyme as I believe to take a single line out of it is to take it out of context. As has been done by some very fragile whites on this site.

I think you need a little song to calm you down:

It is called "Mellow Yellow" and I am sure no Orientals will be offended.

http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=HCCjv2OiTxE&feature=related

Peace and love to all.

Fractelle,

A racist jab is a really irresponsible thing for a presidential inauguration, especially when a black man had been voted in by a majority white country.

And a professional speech writer would of course know the potential offense it could cause, that is their job.

Back in the begging of the thread this is talked about in more depth.

"When Muslims renounce violence" aah.. now Fraccy see's it?

If he had said THAT..wooooooo.. I'll guarantee the whole of Muslim America would be all over the speech writer and Reverend Lowery like the worst rash he ever had.

Such word structures IMPLY that "Muslims are violent"

In eXACTLy the same way as "When whites embrace what is RIGHT" implies that they do not or have not...i.e.. Whites rather..embrace and practice what is WRONG.

It's blatantly outright RACIST and no politician in Australia would ever get away with something like that.

"When blacks embrace Jan 26 as Australia day"...haha de ha ha....

I stand amazed at the incredible lengths that you will spin things in order to minimize impact.. it has to be lawyer speak..... it sure is not the language of the common man.

FORtunately for us.. it is the common man who sits on Juries and NOT a pack of weasly spin minded lawyers.

Oh.. you judged philo :) but he will forgive you I'm sure.

David. When you were talking bible angles, you had foundation, and the politics in general was all a shrinking mass. Its OK to be wrong.


Mate! You have dug your self a deep hole indeed, and this is a day on line, not a witch hunt for who is right or wrong, but you have been caught trying to deceive. If your case holds water, why the coat of many colours?

EVO