Fran Eaton doesn’t respond instead thinking that the most important criticism is that of her spelling of the word busing.

She considers the rest non-substantive which is bizarre to say the least. Let’s start with she cites an Obama critic as evidence that Obama is being compared to all sorts of religious figures, but she never answers the point in that:

As a word of advice, when writing a column, you might try and actually find someone who says Obama is like Jesus, or a savior, or a deity, a possessor of infinite potential, a king, the second coming, or the almighty. Instead, we get treated to another guy who said something without really pointing out an example of someone actually making such comparisons.

You might get the infinite potential bit in some column, but it would be fascinating to find anyone who seriously argues Obama is like Jesus, or a savior, or a deity, a king, the second coming, or the almighty. Sirota is being sarcastic and critical of Obama so it might be a good idea to actually point to people making such comparisons.

Fran is trying to make two points in the list of twelve controversial, but it isn’t clear why they are controversial:

I’m especially interested in learning more about how one adheres to the “Black Work Ethic” and disavows the pursuit of “Middleclassness.”

Of course, I pointed out that middleclassness is the notion that African-Americans who achieve economic mobility often adopt the notion they are superior to those who do not. It doesn’t suggest one should not strive, it means when one is successful one should not judge others who do not succeed. How do I know this? I have actually read source that reference it before. One in particular is a quick google away. It’s the fifth response to the words Obama and Middleclassness in google and would have been the third before Eaton’s postings.

Of course, the list is not a serious list since affirmative action shouldn’t trouble anyone. Enlarging the applicant pool is generally a good thing for all. Racial quotas are illegal and always have been other than in instances to redress specific instances of discrimination. Reparations aren’t mentioned by the list. Busing was used often to move black kids out of white schools yet was only controversial to people like Fran when it was used to reduce geographic isolation. And there aren’t many government programs dependent upon skin color–notice she didn’t mention any, but I’m sure she has tons of examples for us.

Taken in full, it is a rather uncontroversial 12 statements with the only one confusing to most whites being the issue of middleclassness which isn’t about not being middle class, but about looking down at those who aren’t. The Protestant Work Ethic doesn’t quite translate in black churches the same way. Go figure.

As with most religious statements, the political ramifications are quite unclear. While I’d bet most of Trinity’s members are a liberal lot, there is plenty in that value system any conservative could feel argues for less government. This sort of out of context claptrap is only going to increase as this campaign continues

Fran isn’t really interested in learning about or thinking or she might have also read the bit on Trinity’s web site about Black Work Ethic

Adherence to the Black Work Ethic
“It is becoming harder to find qualified people to work in Chicago” Whether this is true
or not, it represents one of the many reasons given by businesses and industries for
deserting the Chicago area. We must realize that a location with good facilities, adequate
transportation and reputation for producing skilled workers will attract industry. We are
in competition with other cities, states, and nations for jobs. High productivity must be a
goal of the Black workforce.

and for the disavowal of middleclassness:

Disavowal of the Pursuit of “Middleclassness”
Classic methodology on control of captives teaches that captors must keep the captive
ignorant educationally, but trained sufficiently well to serve the system. Also, the captors
must be able to identify the “talented tenth” of those subjugated, especially those who
show promise of providing the kind of leadership that might threaten the captor’s control.

Black churches have a history in abolition and resistance to discrimination, hence the language is steeped in the language of those two movements even if most conservatives seem to have only heard one line ever–that being MLK’s one line in a long speech.

The values in Trinity’s statement are non-controversial to both Christians and to Americans.

But don’t let that stop Eaton from trying to draw dark inferences about them.

So to wrap this up for Fran, who is a little slow:

1) where are all these references to Obama as God or other religious figure?

2) You misrepresented policy domains around black politics including affirmative action, quotas, desegregation and busing, reparations, and some amorphous group of government policies.

3) Where is anything in the twelve points requiring support of reparations? Quotas? Busing?

4) They certainly would call for affirmative action which is the point of the idea in middleclassness–African-Americans in the church have a responsibility to address the economic advancement of other African-Americans less well off for them. Affirmative action is just that, taking action to ensure traditionally underrepresented minorities are actually given a chance to compete for jobs. Instead of simply recruiting at magnet schools, recruitment should be done at all schools for colleges is a very basic example.

5) Desegregation is hardly controversial—is anyone suggesting white and black students should be in separate systems? Busing is a rather amorphous term that a good proponent of vouchers such as Eaton might want to think about if she wants a working system of vouchers. It helps to have a plan of how students get to schools they are choosing with vouchers.

6) In terms of a whole host of government programs dependent upon the color of one’s skin, what programs is she even talking about?

Anyone reading the first post of mine would have noticed these objections to Eaton, but she concentrated on a joke about busing. Typical.

3 thoughts on “The Non-Response”
  1. […] Sen. Obama’s church espouses something called the “Black Values System” and claims it is dedicated to Africa and African peoples and the descendant. Guess what? Every church has a values system. Who cares if it’s called “black” or “green” or “way cool”. Guess what else? Every church dedicates its charitable work to some effort. The Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod sends volunteers to … Europe. Why aren’t conservatives up in arms because those Christians are dedicated to … Europe? […]

  2. […] Regardless of whether she’s being soft or acidic in her myopia, myopia it is. The entirety of her premise that Sen. Obama’s Christian church is somehow “bad” and that he is somehow “hypocritical” is based on her own ignorance of the history African American Christianity in this country and her own misreadings of Trinity United Church of Christ’s tenets related to liberation, compassion, charity and community. (Oh, and her disdain for people who dislike her hero, George W. Bush, crossed with a deeply partisan loathing for Sen. Obama himself — to be expected from a former campaigner for Alan Keyes for Senate, Illinois edition.) The intertwined network of conservative partisan media has helped her efforts at promoting this ignorant misinterpretation of basic information. (This wouldn’t be the first time Ms. Eaton proved to be ignorant and apparently willfuly misinformed, nor the second, nor the third, nor the… you get the idea.) […]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *