Creepy O-cult video of the day: “Deliver us, Obama!” Updated
I didn’t think you could top those schoolchildren substituting Obama for Jesus in their public school praise hymn.
Now, thanks to Naked Emperor News and Breitbart TV, we have video of community organizers led by the “Gamaliel Foundation” praying to The One as they lobby for “social justice” and health care for all.
“HEAR OUR CRY, OBAMA!”
“DELIVER US, OBAMA!”
And no, this is not an Onion parody:
Update: Ed Morrissey asks if it’s just bad acoustics. Are they saying “Obama” or “Oh, God?”
Here’s a little background about the Gamaliel Foundation from its history statement:
History of the Movement: This type of community organizing began in Chicago in 1938. Saul Alinsky created the “Back of the Yards Community Council”. The organization operated in the shadow of Chicago’s stock yards. The community was beset with poverty, political corruption, gangs, disease, deteriorating housing and inadequate schools; but most of all it was beset with a sense of powerlessness. The organization successfully engaged people to change the conditions of the community. Its motto was, “We shall decide our own destiny.” And to a large extent and for some time, they did just that. Many organizations were created utilizing the model of the Back of the Yards Council. Unfortunately most of those organizations have dissolved, become stagnant, parochial and marginalized; have evolved into social service, advocacy, or economic development corporations; or have become the fiefdoms of political hacks. The original mission of empowerment and expansion of democracy has, all too frequently, been lost. To insure the promise of community organizing, the Gamaliel Foundation was born.
History of the Gamaliel Foundation: The Gamaliel Foundation was originally established in 1968 to support the Contract Buyers League, an African American organization fighting to protect homeowners on Chicago’s Westside who had been discriminated against by banks and saving and loan institutions. In l986, the Foundation was reorganized as an organizing institute providing resources to community leaders in the efforts to build and maintain powerful organizations in low income communities. The Gamaliel Foundation has grown from three to more than forty-five affiliates in seventeen states and in three provinces of South Africa.
And here’s the background on the Gamaliel/Obama connection from the foundation’s Gregory A. Galluzzo:
President elect Barack Obama has throughout his political career made repeated references to his time as a community organizer on the South Side of Chicago. It is important that we all understand the connection between Barack and Gamaliel. In l980 Mary Gonzales and I created the United Neighborhood Organization of Chicago.
In l982 we decided that we needed some expertise from someone who had done faith based community organizing. A person who had worked as such an organizer in Illinois and in Pennsylvania approached me about joining our organizing team. His name was Jerry Kellman. Jerry helped Mary and myself become better organizers. While he was working for us, he connected with a group called the Calumet Community Religious Conference (CCRC) operating on the South Side in the South Suburbs of Chicago, and in Indiana. CCRC had been formed in response to the massive shut down of major industry and the resulting job loss and all of the concomitant social tragedies.
Jerry and I reached an understanding that we would support his work in the South Suburbs so that he could become director of his own project. It was Jerry Kellman who put an ad in the New York Times about an organizing position in the Chicago area. Barack responded; Jerry interviewed him and offered him a position. Barack accepted. Almost at this very time, Jerry propositioned an old friend of his to return to Chicago from Texas and work with him in this new organizing venture. His friend was Mike Kruglik. Mike and Jerry were the first mentors of Barack in organizing.
CCRC, which spanned communities in Northwest Indiana, the South Suburbs and parts of the City of Chicago proved to be unwieldy. Jerry and I decided to split it into three parts. Barack would work to found a new independent project in the South side of Chicago, Mike Kruglik would be the director of the South Suburban Action Conference and Jerry Kellman would develop organizing in Northwest Indiana. At that point Jerry asked me to become Barack’s consultant.
And at this time we were just creating the Gamaliel Foundation. I met with Barack on a regular basis as he incorporated the Developing Communities Project, as he moved the organization into action and as he developed the leadership structure for the organization. He would write beautiful and brilliant weekly reports about his work and the people he was engaging.
When Barack decided to go to Harvard Law School, he approached John McKnight, a professor at Northwestern and a Gamaliel Board member for a letter of recommendation. When Barack was leaving he made sure that Gamaliel was the formal consultant to the organization that he had created and to the staff that he had hired.
Barack has acknowledged publicly that he had been the director of a Gamaliel affiliate. He has supported Gamaliel throughout the years by conducting training both at the National Leadership Training events and at the African American Leadership Commission. He has also attended our public meetings.
We are honored and blessed by the connection between Barack and Gamaliel.
And here’s Stanley Kurtz last November on Gamaliel and Obama:
The same separatist, anti-American theology of liberation that was so boldly and bitterly proclaimed by Obama’s pastor is shared, if more quietly, by Obama’s Gamaliel colleagues. The operative word here is “quietly.” Gamaliel specializes in ideological stealth, and Obama, a master student of Gamaliel strategy, shows disturbing signs of being a sub rosa radical himself. Obama’s legislative tactics, as well as his persistent professions of non-ideological pragmatism, appear to be inspired by his radical mentors’ most sophisticated tactics. Not only has Obama studied, taught, and apparently absorbed stealth techniques from radical groups like Gamaliel and ACORN, but in his position as a board member of Chicago’s supposedly nonpartisan Woods Fund, he quietly funneled money to his radical allies — at the very moment he most needed their support to boost his political career. It’s high time for these shadowy, perhaps improper, ties to receive a dose of sunlight.
The connections are numerous. Gregory Galluzzo, Gamaliel’s co-founder and executive director, served as a trainer and mentor during Obama’s mid-1980s organizing days in Chicago. The Developing Communities Project, which first hired Obama, is part of the Gamaliel network. Obama became a consultant and eventually a trainer of community organizers for Gamaliel. (He also served as a trainer for ACORN.) And he has kept up his ties with Gamaliel during his time in the U.S. Senate.
The Gamaliel connection appears to supply a solution to the riddle of Obama’s mysterious political persona. On one hand, he likes to highlight his days as a community organizer — a profession with proudly radical roots in the teachings of Chicago’s Saul Alinsky, author of the highly influential text Rules for Radicals. Obama even goes so far as to make the community-organizer image a metaphor for his distinctive conception of elective office. On the other hand, Obama presents himself as a post-ideological, consensus-minded politician who favors pragmatic, common-sense solutions to the issues of the day. How can Obama be radical and post-radical at the same time? Perhaps by deploying Gamaliel techniques. Gamaliel organizers have discovered a way to fuse their Left-extremist political beliefs with a smooth, non-ideological surface of down-to-earth pragmatism: the substance of Jeremiah Wright with the appearance of Norman Vincent Peale. Could this be Obama’s secret?
***
Here’s the Gamaliel Foundation’s Jerry Kellman boasting about his mentoring days with Barack Obama — and gushing about Obama’s story-telling skills.
Well, he sure can tell stories.
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Trackbacks
- The Radio Patriot
- small dead animals
- Axis of Right
- The Snooper Report
- ~ Angry White Boy ~
- Chicago Ray Report
- Jeremiah Films
- OpinionBug.com
- baldilocks
- The Inspired Constitution « I Took The Red Pill (and escaped the Matrix)
- Snapped Shot
- Ephedrine.
- Soloxine levothyroxine sodium 0.7 mg.
- Buy ativan online order ativan online.
- Buy alprazolam.
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Categories: Health care
Stop The ACLU
» Glenn Beck: The Man With The Plan
Pundit & Pundette
» Reports of Broder's retirement greatly exaggeratedAmSpecBlog
» The Road Ahead in the Health Care BattleThe Other McCain
» Is ObamaCare a done deal?NewsBusters.org
» Harry Reid Rips WaPo's David Broder On Senate FloorNewsBusters.org
» Bill Clinton Blames Keith Olbermann for Having to Skip Charity Event
What was the mindset of our founders less than four months before they signed the Declaration of Independence?
The most recognized signature on the Declaration of Independence is that of John Hancock. Take a look at a document that he (and many others) signed less than four months earlier…
(Bolding is mine, capitalization emphasis is from the original text. Based on looking at the original document image, I believe that the Library of Congress transcript has one mistake…that the word they have as “bandage” is actually “bondage” in the original document. I have taken the liberty of using “bondage” in my transcript below…)
The Library of Congress Document Image
The Library of Congress Transcript
Then simply state your concern about such instances. Don’t pretend that the Christians on this site actually upset you with their comments.
corkie:
Fair enough. you are right in this sense. I do not need to pretend that Happy actually upsets me. I can merely point out that her line of thinking feeds these divisions that can lead to the instances that concern me.
ITTRP:
Are you still here? I am not discounting the fact that many founders were religious. It’s not my point. Whether they were Christians, Deists, Hindus, or otherwise makes no difference. The Constitution could have been written by any thinking person from that age from any of those religions. There is nothing overtly religious in the Constitution and that was almost certainly by design.
Corkie:
…an afterthought, pretending I am upset is a good tool for the shock value method that you seem to value. It’s a method I use to try and get through to Happy and others.
Not really. It’s not believable.
I think this is a much better approach.
corkie:
It’s actually worked to some extent in the past (though not with Happy).
corkie:
Do you want to nitpick over the time of day?
My clock says 2:59pm currently. Discuss.
ITTRP:
*sigh* Let’s imagine for a minute that the founders religious inclinations spurred them on to fight for freedom. They still had the good sense in the end to recognize that the founding documents should be secular. You can pretend all you want that saying “year of our Lord” means that makes the Constitution religiously inspired. It’s nonsense. As I said earlier, any thinking person of that age from any religion could have wrote the Constitution. You don’t need to be Christian to have written it.
Explain to me how only a Christian could have written the Constitution.
Ha ha. Too funny.
Why do you like to stretch out comments sections?
corkie:
Sometimes I am just bored. Monster thread (for example) was fun. It turned into a chat line and became like a little club.
You are right wrt the absence of Christian words. You are wrong wrt the culture.
You are a product of a Christian culture, complete with Christian cultural assumptions about the relationship of the individual to God and the relationship of the individual to Caesar.
Jesus saved us, Zero. As much as he saved the Christians. If this culture was Muslim, you and I would be either Muslim or dead. We would not be what we are.
Right on, Roland! But I have a feeling you are going to be very sorry you said that!
And Zero…this thread would be a perfect one to make into the next Monster. It has the word “creepy” in the title.
Roland:
The culture is arguably Greco-Roman as well. The disaster that is the Middle-East and the reason why Muslims are so insane is a great deal more complex then just their disgusting religion. Heck, the Old Testament and the Koran come from similar roots and are equally disturbing.
There are more than a handful of ancient thinkers in the Mid-East that were rather secular and sane and recognized the Koran was full of nonsense. Had history gone slightly different it’s entirely possible the Muslims could have had their Renaissance.
We succeeded in spite of our religious beliefs not because of them. A testament to this is one of the things that sets us aside from the Muslim jihadists. Our sane people don’t take the Holy Text literally.
Christianity is about the New Testament. The Old Testament is residual.
No. They could not. Not without a New Testament.
Perhaps. Depending on how inevitable you consider religious belief by the masses to be.
Either way, some religious beliefs are more conducive to tolerance than others. Once you accept that fact we can move on to discussing how to resist the rapid advance of Islam. Poking fun at reasonable Christians may be counterproductive.
BTW, giving the young earth creationists a kick in the nuts every once in a while cannot be a bad thing.
Roland:
The New Testament contains passages about slaves being obedient to their masters (I quoted one earlier in this thread IIRC). It’s hardly much better.
What? How? If you are referring to light-hearted lessons like “turn the other cheek” and such you don’t need religion for that. It’s entirely possible to be an atheist and still say Jesus had excellent points on a variety of subjects. People like Sam Harris and Dawkins do say this in fact.
I don’t really think I am. Reasonable Christians wouldn’t say I am going to spend eternity in hopelessness and darkness. That’s not reasonable. Besides, Harris makes an excellent point about this. Our tolerance of the slightly less than insane fundamentalists only empowers the rather insane. Basically, this whole idea that religious beliefs are completely off-limits to criticism empowers lunatics like Muslims to cry foul at the UN and elsewhere.
No doubt.
Roland:
Sorry, I misread this line:
I read it as having some religious beliefs is better than none at all. You are quite right. Some religions are better than others in regard to tolerance. Nearly everytime, it is those that take the Holy Book and dogma less than literally.
Someone that takes the Bible literally is every bit as insane and dangerous as someone who takes the Koran seriously.
The history of Europe in the Middle Ages can attest to the brutality of Christians.
/me waits for Happy to chime in with no true scotsman.
Oh here we go:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zEuAVgmWt0U&feature=player_embedded
Glenn Beck says atheists are responsible for the current state of the nation.
What a jerk. F you Glen. I served in Iraq, where were you? I didn’t vote for Obama either.
At first, almost nothing was accomplished in the first 4 to 5 weeks of the Constitutional Convention. It almost ended in complete failure.
What turned it around?
On Thursday, June 28, 1787, Ben Franklin said…
Zero,
Many atheists like to believe that Benjamin Franklin was a deist. But Deists tend to reject the notion of divine interventions in human affairs.
Franklin may have studied Deism, especially when he was in France, but he was clearly rejecting Deism when he said:
Franklin made no less than four references to the Bible in the short address he made to the Constitutional Convention, quoted above. I already linked two of them to their corresponding verses, and here are two more:
ITTRP:
Of course. Ben Franklin invoking God must have been what broke the deadlock. You see only what you want to see ITTRP.
Let’s even pretend it’s true. So what? They all shared similiar religious backgrounds, despite many arguably being and claiming to be Deists or Unitarians (as Franklin did).
Had they all been Hindus a speach about Vishnu would have also spurred them on. None of this means only a Christian could have written the Constitution.
ITTRP:
Franklin was probably a Unitarian and not a Deist.
On September 30th, 2009 at 9:02 pm, zeroangel said:
When you point that finger at me, there are three more pointing back at you.
You’re projecting.
ITTRP:
I am not the one that imagines anti-Christs, doomsday, invisible super-beings, and basically magic. If anyone is seeing make-believe things that they want to see it isn’t me.
zero,
ITTRP:
Yes, quote your magic book to me. Need I go looking for the sections that talk about slavery, rape victims marrying their attackers, killing children, or committing wartime atrocities?
The fact that you are reduced to hurling Bible verses at me is telling. Your moniker is excellent. The Matrix is the perfect analogy for your particular fundamentalism: invisible, unflasifiable fantasy that is possibly indicative of deep seated paranoia.