Redstate

By Socrates Posted in Liberals — Comments (3) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »

So you want to be President. So do a lot of other people, but its popularity notwithstanding, I view the desire to be President as sufficient proof of some yet undetermined chemical imbalance. As circular confirmation, I present two stories from the news of the day.

These stories come in succession of the revelations that the Reverend Jeremiah Wright, Obama's pastor and whom Obama claimed as "mentor", preached silliness from the pulpit while the man who would be king sat in cowed silence. They also follow Obama's speech attacking his grandmother as a racist, and his defense of her that she was a "typical white person".

Ironically, these stories have completely overshadowed Obama's dishonesty about his relationship with Chicago political fixer Tony Rezco and the backroom assurances that he doesn't have a schedule for withdrawing from Iraq, as he claims, and that his NAFTA stance is just more obloviation.

More...

A group with a clear chemical imbalance is the leadership of Hamas, who believe that the way to win support from people is to cheer when you kill their friends. But appearing in the Trinity United Church of Christ newsletter from last summer (during the Presidential race) was an article by Mousa Abu Marzook of Hamas, claiming that Israel has no right to exist.

'Splain me that, Senator Obama. Square that with your public support of Israel. Which is it? Is Israel an ally, or is their existence yet another detail about which you'd be willing to negotiate with terrorists? Hamas claims not to be part of a larger struggle, but the players in the larger struggle make no such claims about Hamas.

In other news, Erick Erickson reports that Rev Jeremiah Wright has been invited to speak in Macon, GA. The mayor of Macon, an Obama supporter, calls Wright's sermon style "Socratic".

Perk my ears!

According to His Honor the mayor, Wright like Socrates has been pilloried for asking the wrong questions, for challenging the status quo.

There is a clear difference between the two, however. Socrates' questions were always intended to winnow, never to incite, to engage, not to attack. His goal was always to arrive at the truth of a matter, not to disseminate some truth he alone possessed. If he asked a question which was out of bounds, he knew it was out of bounds and was expecting an answer to bring the focus back into bounds.

But since it's Friday, I tried to imagine what a typical Wright-as-Socrates session would be like:

Wright: Do you suppose that white people invented AIDS?

SANE ANSWER: I thought it came from monkeys.

Wright: Suppose they did.

SA: OK, suppose they did.

Wright: Then you're saying they did it to kill black people?

SA: No, you said that.

Wright: Suppose they did.

SA: Well, that question presupposes that all white people act in concord, when in the United States AIDS has mostly killed whites.

Wright: Well, what about in Africa? Could there not be white people in Africa who invented AIDS to kill black people?

SA: I suppose there could be.

Wright: So since white people invented AIDS to kill black people, that is why they are giving out needles to also addict them with drugs.

SA: Sure, whatever. Look, I have to go ...

Wright: How can we avoid AIDS when white people are giving us needles, and I.V. drug use is one of the primary ways AIDS is spread?

SA: All someone need do is abstain from sex before marriage, and make sure his prospective mate did the same. But I have to ...

Wright: So you're saying black people can't do that?

SA: Your powers of understanding are unequaled. Good day.

Wright: I knew white people were racists.

I always thought "March Madness" was about basketball.

--
Gone 2500 years, still not PC