http://www.correntewire.com/so_how_exactly_did_mike_huckabees_son_david_kill_tha

Huckabee’s Son Arrested With Gun at Little Rock Airport
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,268762,00.html

Kisses,
Marie

Say, what would the possesive of Jon’ be? “Jon”s” or if her family owned something would that be the “Jon’s’ something?”

Isn’t that basically the main stroke? Hell, I remember the old men in my community not wanting to vote for Regan for that very reason, and I know one old man who steadfastly refuses to vote Republican to this day, though he’s kind of loopy about the whole Neo-Confederate thing. ‘Course, “loopy Neo-Confederate” is redundent, innit. Anyhow, from the 1880s (Hayes’ compromise that ended Reconstruction) until the Southern Strategy, the Solid South’s Democratic stance had less to do with modern politics than them still being hacked off Lee surrendered. Doesn’t make sense, but racists are rarely logical about being a racist.

But, that’s why I brought it up. What some racist jackasses in Mississippi in 1930 were doing as Democrats qua Democrats has fuck all to do with anything the Democratic Party does in 2008. It’s merely a rhetorical trick designed to derail the debate into quibbling about what dead people did that you can’t change because, and let’s be honest here, if the user could argue his/her points on merit, s/he’d be doing that instead. I get the same vibe from this whole quarrell on how much credit self-identifying American Christians and/or American Christianity should get for the successes of the Civil Rights Movement whenever anyone gets shitty about modern American Christians and/or American Christianity and current progressive causes.

Some Christians and some not-Christians did good stuff 40 years ago while others did bad stuff. The good stuff is something to be proud of and the bad stuff maybe not so much. Great, hopefully everyone feels good about him or herself and his or her philosophical choices. Now, let’s worry about dealing with the stuff going on right now. That’s all.

You didn’t and I never suggested that you did. I did, however, point out that many contemporary liberal Christians are engaging in a fair bit of revisionism by putting all Civil Rights-era liberal Christianity firmly in the MLK/SCLC camp. There was a large and vocal contingent of liberal Christians who, despite their opposition to segregation in the abstract, nevertheless served as an impediment to the movement by, for example, saying that MLK’s methods were too radical. Again. please read Dr. King’s Letter From A Birmingham Jail; I’m not saying anything that he himself didn’t say.

Let me give another example from a different issue that might better illuminate the point I’m after here: in 2003 there were a number of liberal columnists who expressed some doubt about the justification behind Bush’s intention to invade Iraq. However, at the same time they were expressing such doubts, they were also excoriating as “unserious”, “weak” and “radical” anyone who actually tried to do anything to stop the invasion. Around here we call those people Sensible Liberals™– people who support the liberal position, but whose commitment to the status quo, and willingness to throw their more pungent allies under the bus, makes them an impediment to real change.

So, if, in 2002, I said that Bush’s plan to invade Iraq was a bad idea but I then set about to call those who protested the war a bunch of dirty fucking hippies, what was my role, exactly? Should I now be able to point the my expressed doubts as a way to suggest that I was always against the war, or should I be judged for acting as a agent of the status quo for slapping down those wanted to do something more disruptive to stop the invasion before it started?

Similarly, how should we judge the role of many white liberal Christian churches during the Civil Rights era? Do we focus solely on their righteous condemnation of the Jim Crow apartheid system, or do we point to the role they played in enabling that system by saying that MLK’s methods were too disruptive and that he himself was a dangerous radical.

My point– indeed my only point throughout this discussion– has been that saying “liberal Christianity was the backbone of the Civil Rights movement” is an oversimplification that ignores the more ambiguous role that liberal churches played during that period. That’s all.

I’m cool with that.

Me too. What matters to me is a person’s commitment to human rights and I don’t really care what intellectual, emotional, or spiritual means you use to get there.

Would it be unreasonable to make the assumption that a large number of southern Democrats were so because Lincoln was a Republican and thus never really embraced Democratic principles at all?

But he was a yankee!
Fail!

Her dogma got hit by her karma.

I doubt I could stop you, frankly. You seem to be looking forward to doing just that thing, so why should I prevent something that’d obviously bring you a little joy? Knock yourself out, son, have a good time. Hell, go nuts and call me a racist or a right-winger. Don’t let my political affiliation hold you back or, you know, what I actually said.

And, yes, I remember Rev. Jackson and Rev. Sharpton, and hell, I remember some of the rest of them, though I’m not a Christian preacher who lived through the Sixties. However, I maintain that for all the Christians who were actively involved in making America live up to the promise that all were created equal, despite race, sex, creed or religion, just as many, if not more, were either sitting on their hands afraid to shake the boat or they were actively using Christianity to reinforce the idea that no one but the Whtie Man should have a fair shake in America. Do you deny this at all?

Look, I’ll say it again, but this is it. Christians had a very visible prescence in the Civil Rights movement mostly because the church was the only place African-American could gather, organize and gain respectability in the pre-Civil Rights era South. Most of your white Christians and liberals either didn’t do shit or, like kingubu said, played the “don’t be an uppity negro” card. Quite a few actively fought the Civil Rights movement. Why? Well, some man wiser than me said that getting someone to change to their mind when their prosperity hinges on them not is damn near impossible.

You know, this whole convorsation reminds me of the old saw that since Southern Democrats were, basically, responsible for the power structure that made the Civil Rights movement so neccessary – indeed, those same Democrats fought hard to keep the racist society in place – modern Democrats and liberals are the real racists. Not only is it a myopic view of history and reality and not only is it used as merely a cudgel to batter those who don’t agree, but it’s got fuck-all to do with the things going on today.

Many Christians may’ve marched proudly and fought for everyone’s rights back in the day and God bless ‘em, but where are all those people now? Why is it the loudest Christian voices we hear are the ones full of the most hatred? And why do most liberal Christians seem spend more time complaining that liberal not-Christians don’t hold their religion in the holiest esteem instead of, you know, confronting those voices that convince not-Christians that all Christians, liberal or conservative, aren’t screaming assholes.

Answer me that, preacherman. Am I really your biggest problem or is it the Focus on the Family and Liberty University crowd?

I dunno, RFK sort of comes to mind, just as one o them famous types, if Catholics count as Christians rather than atheist Jews, and Kennedys count as white males…

Jesse Jackson.

What do I win?

And please tell me you remembered Jesse. Please. Because you know, I’d hate to accuse a fellow liberal of being doctrinnaire.

Name one white one. Name a white male that was involved in the Civil Rights movement that wasn’t a atheist Jewish yankee

William Sloane Coffin leaps to mind. Father Bill Ayres. Fuck Google.

But hey, what do I know? I’m just a fucking Chrisitan minister who actually lived in the Sixties….

Where in my post did I denigrate atheists? I was addressing the Christian movements, right and left.

If a reverend like MLK, assisted by a reverend like Jesse Jackson and Ralph Abernathy, and to some degree, a preacher like Malcom X, isn’t the backbone of the civil rights movement, then I’m not too sure where you think the backbone lies (lays?).

I have nothing against atheists. I often accept the teachings of atheists because they help me think about my faith and learn about how God works. I do have a problem with dogmas on either side, the dogma of religion and the dogma of the atheistic.

I don’t beleive there is “one true way” either thru science or faith. I believe there is one way for each of us. Mine includes God. Yours does not.

I’m cool with that.

There are certainly a lot of in-jokes, and in-jokes within in-jokes, ad inifinitum. We like this kind of thing. If you lurk around for a bit, I think you’ll start to understand and appreciate them too.

I did not see her for a long time, it she looks so much better without that turtleneck!

Would it be possible to organize beach volleyball competition for female right wing bloggers?