The introduction to a recent Christianity Today article begins:
CLASSIC FAITH FOR MODERN TIMES
"The Lord Can Make You Free"
Slave-turned-abolitionist Frederick Douglass crusaded against the "soul-destroying religion" of the slaveholders.
Compiled by Tim Stafford | posted 2/11/2009 03:10PM
Frederick Douglass might be called the Barack Obama of the early 19th century—a figure who revolutionized expectations of black people simply by being himself. A brilliant writer, thinker, and orator, Douglass repeatedly confounded both friends and critics. They found it hard to believe a self-taught former slave could engage as an equal with the intellectual leaders of his day.
The article itself is rather interesting. But this little editor’s introduction is enough to turn the stomach. Frederick Douglass was the ‘Barack Obama’ of the 19th century?!? Really?
How, you say? He was “a figure who revolutionized expectations of black people simply by being himself.”
What an insult to Frederick Douglass! So is the editor implying that Douglass was in favor of using taxpayer’s money for the murder of the unborn? Was Douglass in favor of economic fascism? (Anachronistic, but you get the idea.)
And leaving Douglass aside for now, in what sense has Obama ‘revolutionized the expectations of black people’? What, exactly, are ‘black people’ expecting (in this editor’s mind, at least) to get when B.O. is just ‘being himself’? Does this idiotic editor think black people now expect to get bigger welfare checks? Do they expect to get ever more from the government, at the expense of everyone else? (In this editor’s mind, that is.)
This editor’s fawning over B.O. ends up being very offensive, I would think, not just to the long-dead black man, Frederick Douglass, but also to all living Americans who happen to have a bit more pigment in their skin.
Maybe most darker Americans think this way, but I sincerely hope not. I hope this editor is not the idiot he sounds like here. I truly hope he is wrong.
Frederick Douglass thought it was wrong for people - any people - to be enslaved. A slave, you might recall, is someone who is forced to work for others. Obama is more than content to allow many Americans to work for the state. Could we call this state-sponsored slavery?
Think of the extent to which our government has become like the southern slave-masters of old. If we don’t work for them, we are punished. When we do work for them, they ‘graciously’ hand out a pittance here and there to certain favored slaves, in an attempt to make all the slaves dependent upon the master. And we slaves are supposed to enjoy this arrangement.
Yes, you slaves, let your expectations rise every higher. Barack Obama is just ‘being himself’ and all is well with the world.