Good luck with that. The man child will not be our next president.

Economic models? Awesome! Our department was mostly full of economic nerds with a few economic fat chicks. I want to meet the economic models.

mr_larry: Good luck with that. The man child will not be our next president.

If the man child will not be our next president and cancer face won't be our next president, then who will be?

shanrick: mr_larry: Good luck with that. The man child will not be our next president.

If the man child will not be our next president and cancer face won't be our next president, then who will be?

RON PAUL!!1!

mr_larry: Good luck with that. The man child will not be our next president.

OK, Kreskin...

mr_larry: Good luck with that. The man child will not be our next president.

I know, right! That 47 year old former professor of constitutional law. What a man child! Let's look at your credentials... oh that's right you're the "installer of custom AV equipment/wiring" who has shown himself in previous threads to have only the most tenuous grasp of your "profession".

Well, clearly you're who I'm going to for insightful analysis of who should be running the country. Screw that Obama man-child!

HotLonelyTeenageGirl: mr_larry: Good luck with that. The man child will not be our next president.

I know, right! That 47 year old former professor of constitutional law. What a man child! Let's look at your credentials... oh that's right you're the "installer of custom AV equipment/wiring" who has shown himself in previous threads to have only the most tenuous grasp of your "profession".

Well, clearly you're who I'm going to for insightful analysis of who should be running the country. Screw that Obama man-child!

Ouch. I was just a bystander and that hurt me

NickelP: HotLonelyTeenageGirl: mr_larry: Good luck with that. The man child will not be our next president.

I know, right! That 47 year old former professor of constitutional law. What a man child! Let's look at your credentials... oh that's right you're the "installer of custom AV equipment/wiring" who has shown himself in previous threads to have only the most tenuous grasp of your "profession".

Well, clearly you're who I'm going to for insightful analysis of who should be running the country. Screw that Obama man-child!

Ouch. I was just a bystander and that hurt me

/smackdown?
//been served?
///can I get an OH SNAP?
////help a brother out...

This thread is just like Hillary Clinton -- once the harping began, it never had another chance.

HotLonelyTeenageGirl: mr_larry: Good luck with that. The man child will not be our next president.

I know, right! That 47 year old former professor of constitutional law. What a man child! Let's look at your credentials... oh that's right you're the "installer of custom AV equipment/wiring" who has shown himself in previous threads to have only the most tenuous grasp of your "profession".

Well, clearly you're who I'm going to for insightful analysis of who should be running the country. Screw that Obama man-child!

Oh, Snap!

CNN has just declared Obama the winner. Earliest they've ever called a race.

Was the tag unavailable because it was out knocking on doors for Obama?

HotLonelyTeenageGirl: mr_larry: Good luck with that. The man child will not be our next president.

I know, right! That 47 year old former professor of constitutional law. What a man child! Let's look at your credentials... oh that's right you're the "installer of custom AV equipment/wiring" who has shown himself in previous threads to have only the most tenuous grasp of your "profession".

Well, clearly you're who I'm going to for insightful analysis of who should be running the country. Screw that Obama man-child!

dangelder: This threadMcCain's campaign is just like Hillary Clinton -- once the harping began, it never had another chance.

FTFY

HotLonelyTeenageGirl: mr_larry: Good luck with that. The man child will not be our next president.

I know, right! That 47 year old former professor of constitutional law. What a man child! Let's look at your credentials... oh that's right you're the "installer of custom AV equipment/wiring" who has shown himself in previous threads to have only the most tenuous grasp of your "profession".

Well, clearly you're who I'm going to for insightful analysis of who should be running the country. Screw that Obama man-child!



/Two snaps and a man-child!

Soo...which two elections did they miss?

If it was the Bush elections, then their model may not account for Rovian tactics, which I'm sure there will be plenty of this time around.

Hari Seldon approves.

Almet: Soo...which two elections did they miss?

If it was the Bush elections, then their model may not account for Rovian tactics, which I'm sure there will be plenty of this time around.

1992 and 1960. Big Bush and Nixon. If you asked me to guess, I would have had one.

Tr0mBoNe: Almet: Soo...which two elections did they miss?

If it was the Bush elections, then their model may not account for Rovian tactics, which I'm sure there will be plenty of this time around.

1992 and 1960. Big Bush and Nixon. If you asked me to guess, I would have had one.

I would've thought 1992 was friggin' clear...I mean, Carville had a slogan about it and everything.

Bottom line, Obama will win if special interest groups keep their farking mouth's shut.

betasp: Bottom line, Obama will win if special interest groups keep their farking mouth's shut just as sure as the sun rises.

FTFY

betasp: Bottom line, Obama will win if special interest groups keep their farking mouth's shut.

Who did you have in mind, exactly? Oil companies and tobacco producers telling you that smoke is good for your lungs? Wal-Mart warning its workers that voting for Obama will make it easier for them to unionize? Bankers pleading for rescue by socialism while homeowners (and innocent renters) get kicked out on the street? Health insurance corporations defending their right to cancel your coverage if you actually need it?

Did I leave anyone out? Help me here.

/Thinks Obama's got it all locked up.

GREAT Economics model....

filth: Economic models? Awesome! Our department was mostly full of economic nerds with a few economic fat chicks. I want to meet the economic models.

Very late to the party, but +1 sir, that was F'n funny!

Well duh.

Let the mockery of President Obama begin.

mr_larry: Good luck with that. The man child will not be our next president.

lol, that "man-child" is more accomplished than you will EVER be, smarter than you. You are not fit to carry his jock.

Oh, and he will be the next president.

HotLonelyTeenageGirl: mr_larry: Good luck with that. The man child will not be our next president.

I know, right! That 47 year old former professor of constitutional law. What a man child! Let's look at your credentials... oh that's right you're the "installer of custom AV equipment/wiring" who has shown himself in previous threads to have only the most tenuous grasp of your "profession".

Well, clearly you're who I'm going to for insightful analysis of who should be running the country. Screw that Obama man-child!

That was something special right there. I believe I'll screenshot it and save the moment forever.

HotLonelyTeenageGirl: mr_larry: Good luck with that. The man child will not be our next president.

I know, right! That 47 year old former professor of constitutional law. What a man child! Let's look at your credentials... oh that's right you're the "installer of custom AV equipment/wiring" who has shown himself in previous threads to have only the most tenuous grasp of your "profession".

Well, clearly you're who I'm going to for insightful analysis of who should be running the country. Screw that Obama man-child!

Careful with those, you'll sprain something being that awesome.

Is "man-child" his sneaky way of saying "boy" instead so he doesn't sound racist?

HotLonelyTeenageGirl: mr_larry: Good luck with that. The man child will not be our next president.

I know, right! That 47 year old former professor of constitutional law. What a man child! Let's look at your credentials... oh that's right you're the "installer of custom AV equipment/wiring" who has shown himself in previous threads to have only the most tenuous grasp of your "profession".

Well, clearly you're who I'm going to for insightful analysis of who should be running the country. Screw that Obama man-child!

Welcome to my favorites list.

HotLonelyTeenageGirl: mr_larry: Good luck with that. The man child will not be our next president.

I know, right! That 47 year old former professor of constitutional law. What a man child! Let's look at your credentials... oh that's right you're the "installer of custom AV equipment/wiring" who has shown himself in previous threads to have only the most tenuous grasp of your "profession".

Well, clearly you're who I'm going to for insightful analysis of who should be running the country. Screw that Obama man-child!

But but but... Osama's a secret Muslim with a crazy Christian pastor.... he's too thin to be president... people like him too much... he doesn't drink coffee, only orange juice. He's only been a lawyer, a community organizer, a constitutional law professor, state assemblyman and a U.S. Senator so he's clearly unqualified!

HotLonelyTeenageGirl: mr_larry: Good luck with that. The man child will not be our next president.

I know, right! That 47 year old former professor of constitutional law. What a man child! Let's look at your credentials... oh that's right you're the "installer of custom AV equipment/wiring" who has shown himself in previous threads to have only the most tenuous grasp of your "profession".

Well, clearly you're who I'm going to for insightful analysis of who should be running the country. Screw that Obama man-child!

HotLonelyTeenageGirl Wins.

Flawless Victory.

F A T A L I T Y
^{[mr_larry's blood dripping here]}

filth: Economic models? Awesome! Our department was mostly full of economic nerds with a few economic fat chicks. I want to meet the economic models.

Brilliant.

Two economists were walking down the road.

One said to the other as they walked past a Maserati dealership, I want that car.

The other one said, apparently not.

/Economists think that is a scream.

I hate Chevy: he's too thin to be president... people like him too much...

Okay, my sarcastometer isn't on the fritz, but seriously... nobody has really tried to use that one, have they?

HotLonelyTeenageGirl: I know, right! That 47 year old former professor of constitutional law. What a man child! Let's look at your credentials... oh that's right you're the "installer of custom AV equipment/wiring" who has shown himself in previous threads to have only the most tenuous grasp of your "profession".

Well, clearly you're who I'm going to for insightful analysis of who should be running the country. Screw that Obama man-child!

But apparently running around yelling 'pancakes' or 'McSame' qualifies one to give 'insightful analysis', it's only when somebody makes a crack about Obama that they are idiots.

But yes, do go ahead and support the 20 year member of a racist church who keeps the council of American terrorists.

mr_larry: Good luck with that. The man child will not be our next president.

Of course not. He's already served two terms and is ineligible.

predicted nothing

the "economic model" has been used with less than five presidential elections and it said Gore won...

Frankly I don't really care which one of these bastards wins... nobody trusts Obama and everybody knows what McCain is about. I think this will be like any other national election of president since Taft.

But I do know one thing: Never trust a Northern Illinois politician.

KellyX: Is "man-child" his sneaky way of saying "boy" instead so he doesn't sound racist?

yes

randomjsa: WHARRGARBL

you want some cheese to go with that whine?

Fark is gonna be great the day after Obama's losing night.

...nothing more entertaining than ranting libtards except for maybe the crying of their mainstream media lapdogs.

prjindigo: and it said Gore won...

so what's the problem?

...and we have a lovely parting gift for the now assless mr_larry:


/Thanks for playing FARK
//Man Child 08

correlatoin != causation ?
anyone ? anyone ??? 45 posts in and no one's said it ?

The fark is strong with this one...

randomjsa: But yes, do go ahead and support the 20 year member of a racist church who keeps the council of American terrorists.

A) Welcome to my favorites list! A comment like this really deserves to be remembered in all our future interactions.

B)


Really? You're going to try and trot out those talking points so they can find some brains to eat up? Your "racist church" comment shows a severe ignorance regarding both the definition of "racism" and the tenets of liberation theology as a broad category and "black liberation theology" as a specific subcategory.

And Ayers? Really? That talking point is so dead (new window) that I'm surprised its zombie version has enough of a head left to persist. I suppose that it must simply be its body which has been utterly destroyed. Now the jaw works to slowly roll the head around in its perpetual quest for more brains to destroy.

I'll deal with Ayers first, because it is by far the easier to refute. Obama has had the following dealings with William Ayers. In 1995, his predecessor in the Illinois State Senate held a meet-and-greet fundraiser with some of her strongest supporters, including Ayers, at Ayers home to introduce the man she had chosen to replace her in the State Senate: Barack Obama. In 2001, Ayers made a $200 contribution to Obama's re-election campaign for State Senate. Between 1999 and 2002 (new window) Obama and Ayers both served on the board of the Woods Fund of Chicago, a charitable organization that fights poverty. That's it. If that constitutes "keeping the council of American terrorists", then we have bigger problems than an Obama presidency: we have, as a nation, lost all sense of reason and context and have given our free will to the peddlers of bullshiat who want to control us with whatever ideas will appeal to our basic and base animal instincts. Let's not give them the power to manipulate us quite so easily.

(More on Liberation Theology is coming).

MilesTeg: Fark is gonna be great the day after Obama's losing night.

...nothing more entertaining than ranting libtards except for maybe the crying of their mainstream media lapdogs.

This.

Sure lots of people say they will vote for Obama, but when it comes down to it, in the privacy of the voting booth they are not going to vote for a black guy with a funny name.

Even if every eligible black voter voted for him, there are still enough bigots out there -especially Democrat do what I say, not what I do types- that will never pull the lever for a black man.

randomjsa:

Now, about the "racist church" comment. There is one good thing about the way you phrased this. You have emphasized the system as the potential source of racism rather than the people. People working in the area of reconciliation studies right now have tended to prefer identifying these systemic elements as the locus of racism, because racism requires power. You are probably familiar with the previous definition: "racism = prejudice + power". This newer understanding, however, focuses on the power element and realizes that all people have prejudices of varying degrees; it is the systems in society that give certain people the power to act on their prejudices in ways that are harmful toward others. Often, either explicitly or implicitly, these systems propagate racist power dynamics and encourage prejudicial belief systems on the part of those who live under their influence. So, I will give you a "Good on ya!" for getting that much right. Now, let's talk about how nonsensical your statement is.

First of all, let's assume that the church's teaching can be accurately described as racist, look at the societal systems at work. In our society, African-American families, on average, have 1/6 the wealth of average Anglo-American families. The median African-American household has 1/15 the wealth of the median Anglo-American household. In addition, the vast majority of legislators and CEOs are Anglo-American as have been all presidents up until now. What leads you to believe that our societal structures place African-Americans and their institutions in positions of power over Anglo-Americans, allowing them to act out their anti-white prejudice in harmful ways?

Now, on to the content of the church's belief system. For a basic grounding in the broad tenets of Liberation Theology, I recommend that you ignore Bill O'Reilly's description, as he has not grounding in theology. Instead, I would turn to Justo Gonzalez's Manana: Christian Theology from a Hispanic Perspective (new window). Liberation theology is grounded in noticing that Jesus spent most of his time with those on the margins of society. He ate meals with and generally had positive things to say to people like prostitutes, tax collectors, and "sinners". On the other hand, his interactions with people who were wealthy and powerful, especially the religious elites, were full of critiques and accusations. As a result of this evidence, liberation theologians assert that those on the margins of society, those who are oppressed and less powerful, are in a privileged place when it comes to understanding the content of Jesus' teaching.

One final, central element of liberation theology, in general, is that all teaching and all doctrine is inherently political. Some doctrines are more explicitly political than others, but all doctrines have political implications. As a result, there is an emphasis on the current and present situation when interpreting any passage of Scripture or examining a theological position. One example is found in the passage from Isaiah that Jesus reads in the third gospel at the beginning of his ministry. In that passage, when it says that Jesus has come to free the captives and heal the sick, liberation theologians would say that Jesus meant that he was literally going to free people from bondage and heal them.

So that was liberation theology, in general. Now on to "black liberation theology". As I am sure that Bill O'Reilly informed you, black liberation theology is grounded in the teaching of James Cone. Cone was writing at the height of the civil rights movement from a history in which Christianity was forced upon a group of people who had been enslaved and brought across the Atlantic Ocean against their will. They arrived in America and were forced to leave their previous religious experience (usually Muslim) behind and adopt Christian religious practices. In other words, Christianity was used as a weapon by the white slavers to keep the black slaves in place. Teachings focused on passages in Paul about being good slaves and good slave owners or on being content with where one is. In spite of the best efforts of the slavers, other stories were told, as well: stories like that of the Exodus from Egypt or the return from captivity in Babylon, and because of their tradition of oral history, it took few tellings for the passages to be memorized and passed on. Decades after slavery was abolished, these stories, still alive in the imagination of African-American theologians, formed the basis of black liberation theology.

That is the milieu in which Cone was writing. Oddly enough, his anger at the oppression of the black community and his emphasis on the liberation passages in the Older Testament came together to establish a new way of looking at Scripture. For centuries, slaves had been subjected to the Jesus presented by the Europeans and a God who was an old, muscular, white man. In all the art they encountered, Jesus was a younger, bearded, white man. In other words, European-Americans more fully imaged God than did African-Americans. Cone reacted against this by saying that Jesus was black. God was a spirit, but was "FOR blacks". He attempted to reclaim the African-American imago Dei. In a reaction against the exclusivity of his oppressors, he created an equally exclusive understanding of God. God was only in favor of the black community. Any God who could be for both the blacks and the whites was viewed as just as oppressive as the God who was only for the whites. In essence, this is a theological version of the self-talk therapists encourage people who have low self-esteem to practice: "I am a good person. I have value. I have many talents. &c."

As a theologian/therapist-in-training, do I think that this is a healthy thing? In the long run, probably not. This is not a good place to stay for a long time. That said, I think that developmentally it is an essential step in the journey out of oppression and devaluing to which the black community in America has been subjected. It is about accessing the truth that they have the same value as those who believed themselves superior to them. Part of that, is in blacks having the same freedom to see themselves as superior, again, not in the long term, but for a while so that they can no longer see themselves as inferior.

There is a new movement in black theology away from this exclusivity. It seems that this developmental stage is near its end. The black community is moving forward. That is a good thing, but let us not too harshly judge those who laid the groundwork that allowed them to take this next step. This exclusivity was not about oppressing the other. They did not have the power to perpetrate any such thing. It was about building up the self in the face of overwhelming oppression and, therefore, not remotely racist.

mcwebe0: randomjsa:

Now, about the "racist church" comment. There is one good thing about the way you phrased this. You have emphasized the system as the potential source of racism rather than the people. People working in the area of reconciliation studies right now have tended to prefer identifying these systemic elements as the locus of racism, because racism requires power. You are probably familiar with the previous definition: "racism = prejudice + power". This newer understanding, however, focuses on the power element and realizes that all people have prejudices of varying degrees; it is the systems in society that give certain people the power to act on their prejudices in ways that are harmful toward others. Often, either explicitly or implicitly, these systems propagate racist power dynamics and encourage prejudicial belief systems on the part of those who live under their influence. So, I will give you a "Good on ya!" for getting that much right. Now, let's talk about how nonsensical your statement is.

First of all, let's assume that the church's teaching can be accurately described as racist, look at the societal systems at work. In our society, African-American families, on average, have 1/6 the wealth of average Anglo-American families. The median African-American household has 1/15 the wealth of the median Anglo-American household. In addition, the vast majority of legislators and CEOs are Anglo-American as have been all presidents up until now. What leads you to believe that our societal structures place African-Americans and their institutions in positions of power over Anglo-Americans, allowing them to act out their anti-white prejudice in harmful ways?

Now, on to the content of the church's belief system. For a basic grounding in the broad tenets of Liberation Theology, I recommend that you ignore Bill O'Reilly's description, as he has not grounding in theology. Instead, I would turn to Justo Gonzalez's Manana: Christian Theology from a Hispanic Perspective (new window). Liberation theology is grounded in noticing that Jesus spent most of his time with those on the margins of society. He ate meals with and generally had positive things to say to people like prostitutes, tax collectors, and "sinners". On the other hand, his interactions with people who were wealthy and powerful, especially the religious elites, were full of critiques and accusations. As a result of this evidence, liberation theologians assert that those on the margins of society, those who are oppressed and less powerful, are in a privileged place when it comes to understanding the content of Jesus' teaching.

One final, central element of liberation theology, in general, is that all teaching and all doctrine is inherently political. Some doctrines are more explicitly political than others, but all doctrines have political implications. As a result, there is an emphasis on the current and present situation when interpreting any passage of Scripture or examining a theological position. One example is found in the passage from Isaiah that Jesus reads in the third gospel at the beginning of his ministry. In that passage, when it says that Jesus has come to free the captives and heal the sick, liberation theologians would say that Jesus meant that he was literally going to free people from bondage and heal them.

So that was liberation theology, in general. Now on to "black liberation theology". As I am sure that Bill O'Reilly informed you, black liberation theology is grounded in the teaching of James Cone. Cone was writing at the height of the civil rights movement from a history in which Christianity was forced upon a group of people who had been enslaved and brought across the Atlantic Ocean against their will. They arrived in America and were forced to leave their previous religious experience (usually Muslim) behind and adopt Christian religious practices. In other words, Christianity was used as a weapon by the white slavers to keep the black slaves in place. Teachings focused on passages in Paul about being go ...

What a steaming pile of crap.

mild7

Thanks for trying out.