Once more, Chicago's esteemed men of the cloth make themselves heard:
http://cbs2chicago.com/topstories/Citys.Clergy.Plans.2.946816.html
P, you wrote a fairly scathing piece soon after the election lambasting a number of Chicago's African American clergymen for corruption and racial politics. I really don't see any of this changing in the forseeable future.
These men (and, branching out, women if we include some of the aldermen who have, in so many words, proclaimed that anyone who calls for Burris' impeachment is a racist pig) sincerely believe that a man should be judged not by the content of his character, but by the color of his skin. I truly believe they do. They're an affront not only to Dr. King's signature message, but to one of the core principles of President Obama's campaign. And they're an affront to me.
I wonder, what incites more raw anger and speechifying in me? Venality, dishonor, and an utter lack of humility (as displayed by both Former Governor Blagoevich and Still-Senator Burris), or racist ideology and incitement (as represented by the aforementioned clergy and aldermen who dishonor their positions)? You've known me for years P. Either of these stand out as being especially notable? I ask because I've noticed that, under normal conditions, I'll calmly debate or discuss just about anything. However, whenever someone displaying either of the above-mentioned personality traits comes to the fore in the news cycle, I start seething with an unacceptable anger bordering on rage.
