I make less money than the Obama’s but more than the average American. Like the Obama’s, (and unlike the McCain’s) I never leave a cent on my credit cards. I also have the good financial sense with my mortgage not to have paid the customary “points” but elected the zero points interest rate (an option available to most borrowers). And, while I am probably not as good of a credit risk as the Obama’s, I also obtained a mortgage with the same discount they got.

Not only have the congressional Republicans abandoned any sense of fiscal responsibility in government, they no longer have an understanding of the benefits of good credit.

And even if Obama IS a Muslim, WHO CARES?

No. But sympathetic reading of texts generally allows one to summarize the author accurately. I wonder how many seconds it took for T. Shaw to find the quote cited above? He certainly didn’t spend any time exploring its context. David at least spent enough time to note the way in which Cone is using the terms “black” and “white,” which is 100% correct. Anyone who tries to understand Cone without taking that basic point into consideration, like T. Shaw, is bound to misunderstand him.

As someone who is studying liberation theology, I am probably in a position to suggest that David’s reading of Cone is more accurate than T. Shaw’s.

Forgive me also if I find it unacceptable for politicians to talk about “all options” being available to bully other people who don’t threaten us. I find the mass killing of civilians by nuclear or other means to be morally unacceptable under any circumstances. I won’t vote for people who think it otherwise, Democrat or Republican. We’re not required to vote for either one, you know.

So Obama is bad because he said good things about Wright, who is bad because he said good things about Cone, who is bad because of the quote you reproduce? I spent about 10 minutes searching the Internet for information about what Cone believes, and when he makes statements like, “If God is not for us and against white people, then he is a murderer . . . .” he is using black/white to mean oppressed/oppressor.
http://www.nathanielturner.com/dialogueonblacktheology.htm

Without equating Cone and Jesus, I would nevertheless point out that if you take isolated statements of Jesus, you might very well question his “Christianity.” For example, “”If any one comes to me without hating his father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters, and even his own life, he cannot be my disciple.”

An email from Ireland…a point to ponder despite your political affiliation:

‘We, in Ireland, can’t figure out why people are even bothering to hold an election in the United States.

On one side, you have a pants wearing lawyer, married to a lawyer who can’t keep his pants on, who just lost a long and heated primary against a lawyer who goes to the wrong church, who is married to yet another lawyer, who doesn’t even like the country her husband wants to run.

Now…On the other side, you have a nice old war hero whose name starts with the appropriate Mc terminology married to a good looking younger woman who owns a beer distributorship.

What in the Lord’s name are you lads thinking?

HOPE CHANGE FAITH ETHICS ABORTION

Barack Obama on his pastor, Rev. Dr. Jeremiah Wright:
“As imperfect as he may be, he has been like family to me. He strengthened my faith, officiated my wedding, and baptized my children. Not once in my conversations with him have I heard him talk about any ethnic group in derogatory terms, or treat whites with whom he interacted with anything but courtesy and respect. He contains within him the contradictions – the good and the bad – of the community that he has served diligently for so many years. I can no more disown him than I can disown the black community.” – Speech, March 18, 2008

Rev. Dr. Jeremiah Wright, Barak Obama’s pastor, on Dr. James Cone:
“I do not in any way disagree with Dr. Cone, nor do I diminish the inimitable and incomparable contributions that he has made …” – Speech to the National Press Club, April 28, 2008.

Dr. James Cone, father of Black Liberation Theology, on the meaning of the term:
“Black theology refuses to accept a God who is not identified totally with the goals of the black community. If God is not for us and against white people, then he is a murderer, and we had better kill him. The task of black theology is to kill Gods who do not belong to the black community … Black theology will accept only the love of God which participates in the destruction of the white enemy. What we need is the divine love as expressed in Black Power, which is the power of black people to destroy their oppressors here and now by any means at their disposal. Unless God is participating in this holy activity, we must reject his love.” – “A Black Theology of Liberation.”

That sounds unlike Christianity. I’d rather he come out of his muslim closet than believe any of that.

“Obama had no prior relationship with the lender, was taking out a $1.32 million loan below market rates, without paying the customary fees. So what? . . . Barack Obama did precisely what every other politician does, and nothing more. The only reason this story merits any attention is that Obama’s campaign has created a mythology around him that casts him as a reformer.”
Yeah, “Barack Obama: More of the Same” wouldn’t have been much of a slogan.

Who are these people? I don’t know any.