HISTORICAL IGNORANCE

July 23, 2019

 

Even though it can be extremely painful, I periodically feel compelled to watch network news in order to observe their jaundiced spin on current issues.  On July 19, ABC once again held to its high standard of premeditated distortions of the facts.  Three times the broadcast referred to the President’s tweets about the congressional “squad of four” as “racist tweets.”  There are, however, millions of Americans who do not consider them racist at all.  Consequently, the “racist tweets” reported are an opinion, not a fact.  Mr. Trump was simply making the point that these women who have all made an abundance of negative comments about America should go somewhere else to show us how to build a better country.  The axiom holds true regardless of the color of the Constitutional critic.

The folks at the networks have always been historically challenged but it might do them some good to examine the thoughts of Barrak Obama’s hero, Ol’ Honest Abe.  The Great Emancipator said in his first Inaugural Address on March 4, 1861:  “I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the states where it exists.  I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so.”

Although this middle-of-the-road position may come as a surprise to the typically uninformed champion of human rights, what Lincoln believed about the race issue itself would provoke several thousand liberal ulcers.  In a debate with Stephen Douglas at Charlestown, Illinois, on September 18,1858, Lincoln disclosed, as cited by Richard Current:  “ I will say then that I am not, nor have ever been in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races, (applause) ---that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of Negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality.  And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any man am in favor of having the superior position of the white race.”

“What’s that?” you say.  “I never heard that in my history class.”  You don’t say!  Try this one on for size.  In a speech to a delegation of free blacks at the White House, August 14, 1862, Lincoln really split some rails:  “Your race suffers very greatly, many of them, by living among us, while ours suffers from your presence.  In a word, we suffer on each side.  If this is admitted, it affords a reason at least why we should be separated.  Why should the people of your race be colonized, and where?  Why should they leave this country?  This is, perhaps the first question for proper consideration.  You and we are different races.  We have between us a broader difference than exists between almost any other two races.  The aspiration of men is to enjoy equality with the best when free, but on this broad continent not a single man of your race is made the equal of a single man or ours.  See our present condition – the country engaged in war – our white men cutting one another’s throats…and then consider what we know to be the truth.  But for your race among us there could not be war…it is better for us both, therefore, to be separated.”

Haiti, Panama, and Liberia were the leading sites under consideration by the American colonization Society for resettlement of the black population.  As late as March, 1865, a month before his assassination, Lincoln was considering the removal of the entire black population from the United States.  In the light of these statements and a myriad of similar others available to any honest researcher, the unavoidable question demands an answer.  Why is the Lincoln Memorial not under the same attack as the symbols of Southern leadership?  Of course, the explanation lies at the feet of a political agenda.  It is expedient to bury the facts and create opinions…i.e. ABC!

It may come as a thunderbolt to stunned neophytes that God is a racist.  Even though Israel has been repeatedly subjected to divine discipline, the Lord continues to speak of them favorably.  Conversely, the ancient Moabites, which are mentioned some seventy times in the Scriptures, occupy no space for accolades or accomplishment.  Jeremiah 48 is composed of forty-seven verses outlining the sins and eventual judgment on Moab.  The Psalmist recorded God’s metaphorical estimation of Moab when he said:  “Moab is my washpot” (Psalm 60:8, 180:9). Clearly, their comparison to a bathroom sink is not flattering which obviously makes God a bigot.  But wait, the Lord names an entire book of Scripture after a notable exception: Ruth the Moabite, who is one of four Gentile women in the Messianic line leading to Christ!  It doesn’t require diligent inquiry to determine that God judges not on the color of skin but on the content of character ---did a white guy say that?

Even though I have pastored people of every color and had preachers of every color grace my pulpit, the accusation of racist occasionally gets flung in our direction.  If you are a Bible believing Conservative, expect it.  But remember, the Leftists depend on ignorance.

Please reload

RECENT POSTS

November 11, 2019

November 5, 2019

October 28, 2019

October 9, 2019

September 23, 2019

September 16, 2019

September 10, 2019

August 20, 2019

Please reload

Archive
Please reload