Some perspective on job & economic reality over the last few years

Five years ago when Black Jesus was crowned as the second coming and elected to the once prestigious office of the President of the United States, I remember having a few discussion with a bunch of progressive types at work. My warnings that Black Jesus and his cadre were about to destroy the economy, through the usual progressive belief that forceful coercion of the laws of economics, physics, chemistry, and human nature, by government fiat, were dismissed as crazy talk. Even worse, these types all stressed that the new democrat takeover amounted to the people agreeing with them that using the power of government to force their ideological beliefs and agenda on a reality that didn’t care a whit about unicorns or stupid collectivist fantasies about engineering “social justice” or what not, was a given.

In this case they told me Obama’s win was a mandate (not to be confused with 2 guys going out on a date) to create whatever the fuck a “green” economy is supposed to. That was the wave of the future. And Obama’s green economy was going to make America great, fix the economy, and make a lot of people rich. They were partially right: some people connected to the democrats got very rich from this idiotic green economy nonsense. Tax payers and America however didn’t fare so well. And we all know that despite the propaganda about how the economic recovery is just around the corner that we have been continuously subjected to by the LSM for the last 5 years, followed by all that “unexpected” revision to bad news, that our economy remains on life support.

Without the annual trillion dollar government stimulus spending porkulous handouts to democrat friends, lobbyists, donors, and campaign coffers, we would be in a nose dive. They have been playing fast and loose with fiscal policy. Printing, borrowing, and in general playing a shell game – we have not had a budget because of our Senate for going on 5 years now – all to mitigate the obvious damage they are doing. That green jobs economy has not only not materialized, it has sucked up billions and returned little.

But the funny thing is that as part of that green jobs agenda they have been hard at work destroying what they refer to as the brown (carbon fuel based) economy. And yet, we now find out that despite their massive campaign against the brown economy, that it is the brown economy that is creating jobs and wealth. Can you imagine how much better things would be for the economy and job market situation if these fucks were not undermining this growth at every opportunity and pissing away so much money trying to pretend their green economy is anything but a fantasy? From the article:

President Obama’s campaign promises of millions of green jobs haven’t materialized. A draft report by the Government Accountability Office found that the Labor Department’s $500 billion program to train people for green jobs produced just 55 percent of its targeted job placements—and most of those jobs were not in the solar or biofuels industries. But while green employment withers, brown jobs are booming: according to the US Bureau of Labor Statistics, the oil and gas industry has added more than 162,000 jobs since 2007, a 40 percent increase. That growth rate is much higher than that of the total private sector, which has grown just 1 percent over the same time period.

The benefits of these new oil and gas jobs—which include positions drilling the wells, extracting the oil and gas, and supporting drilling operations—extend well beyond the men and women working American shale fields, the Energy Information Administration reports:

Beyond within-sector employment, oil and gas industry activity also directly supports output and employment in other domestic sectors, such as suppliers of pipe, drilling equipment, and other drilling materials. In addition, as with other forms of economic activity, there are indirect employment effects stemming from purchases made by industry and employees spending of their incomes. Because employee expenditures are closely tied to their incomes, higher paying jobs, such as those in the oil and gas sector, tend to have larger indirect effects on output and employment than lower paying ones.

The shale boom isn’t just providing American industry with cheap energy; it’s giving hundreds of thousands of Americans high-paying jobs and a path to recovery from the recent recession.

Let me ask again: can you imagine how much better this growth would be if the people that think government should pick winners & losers – meaning they get to choose who, works, who’s not paying too much for basic necessities, who gets wealthy, and who doesn’t – were not allowed to pull that shit? This green nonsense needs to die off, and die off quick.

Comments are closed.

  1. Seattle Outcast

    CM will now make a statement about how you’re lying – and what’s worse, all these jobs are contributing to “global warming” (did you notice that they aren’t calling it “climate change” any longer? we’re back to “global warming” again) and need to be banned in favor of “green energy”, which is the only future that won’t “kill the planet”…

    Hot! Thumb up 7

  2. Technomad

    The main problem with “green technology” is, at seventh and last, that it does not work, or at least, does not work nearly as well as what we already have! All the dorm-room bull session talk in the world about solar power, wind power, and all the rest of that rubbish won’t change that!

    And one thing the eco-nuts repeatedly forget is that the solar panels and windmill generators they want are not built by happy hippie villagers in quaint, eco-friendly communally-run villages…they’re the product of that nasty old industry the eco-nuts hate so much, and the byproducts of building them (solar panels in particular) are often strongly not-good for the environment in their own rights.

    Thumb up 10

  3. Seattle Outcast

    It’s merely insisting on a fantasy on their part. They’ve dreamed about it so much that it MUST be true, and it’s those evil goons over “big oil” and “big coal” that are deliberately keeping it from making the world perfect. Never mind that the physics of solar power say it can’t EVER work, if they just believe hard enough, then they’ll get their hands on the one ring and rule with an iron…., I mean, “save the world” with “green technology”…..

    Thumb up 3

  4. AlexInCT *

    It’s merely insisting on a fantasy on their part. They’ve dreamed about it so much that it MUST be true,

    I disagree. I believe that most of the people in government pushing this shit know damned well it doesn’t work and don’t care. They have their cadre of true believers that will suck their dicks and sop up all the fucking lies, and they use these morons to justify theft on a scale that only government can do coupled with a massive erosion of freedoms. The last 5 years have provided ample proof, not just here in the US but around the globe, that this movement is a giant fucking criminal organization and that it is about expanding the power of government and those in it, controlling access to energy and thus the people, and making oodles of money if you are one of the connected few.

    Al Gore was not available for comments, but the Sheik he sold his TV station to and the masseuse he molested said he agreed with this sentiment wholeheartedly and wants to thank all the fucking morons that have supported him and made him stinking fucking rich.

    Thumb up 1

  5. Seattle Outcast

    Well, of course the politicians don’t believe that line of horseshit, but they’ve got favors and debts to pay off with our tax dollars. You can spot the ones that are believers, like Pelosi and Boxer – they’re routinely savaged for making idiotic comments/speeches.

    Obama believes some of his own horseshit, but the green stuff is merely payola to him. At his core he’s little more than a race-baiting Marxist like Sharpton, only moderately more intelligent (Sharpton is flat-out stupid, all you need is to watch one interview to see that plain as day) and with a better speaking voice (provided he has his teleprompter and fake interview questions).

    Thumb up 3

  6. CM

    I love how the author said $500 billion instead of $500 million. Obviously paying lots of attention. It also didn’t take long to realise that the ‘55%’ claim is despite the fact that the assessment “lacks data for roughly 40 percent” of the grantees. The author also doesn’t seem to want to include the private green jobs created, but is happy to use private oil and gas jobs in the comparison. But hey, ALGOREBLACKJESUSCLIMATECHANGEFRAUD!

    Thumb up 3

  7. CM

    This year’s second quarter saw a massive surge in solar panel shipments, with three of the four largest manufacturers outdoing projections by as much as 32 percent, Bloomberg reports. Much of that was due to rising demand in Asia, where China and Japan could soon make up half the global demand for solar — with China in particular planning to double its solar capacity to about 10 gigawatts this year, and increase it by five times by 2015. According to Stefan Linder, an analyst with Bloomberg New Energy Finance (BNEF), that swelling demand should soak up much of the oversupply solar manufacturers were recently struggling under. At the end of July, BNEF reported recovering solar stocks as well.

    Solar’s prices may soon compete with those of traditional utilities without the aid of subsidies — something that Deustche Bank’s latest market research calls a “third growth phase.” That doubles down on a similar finding the Germany-based financing and banking giant put out earlier this year. Thanks to balancing levels of supply and demand in both China and the rest of the global market, the cost of solar modules is stabilizing at 60 to 70 cents per watt, while the cost of installation has reached $1 to $1.20 per watt. Put it all together and solar’s levelized cost — the overall price at which it can deliver electricity generation when accounting for all its lifecycle inputs — is between 10 and 20 cents per kilowatt-hour for large portions of the globe.

    According to Deutsche Bank, that leaves solar power hitting grid parity in eleven major markets worldwide — Los Angeles, Hawaii, Chile, Japan, South Korea, Australia, South Africa, Israel, Italy, Spain, and Greece — meaning its levelized cost can compete unsubsidized with traditional sources of electricity. The report also sees the potential for solar to cross that threshold in 10 to 20 other markets within the next 3 years. As soon as 2014, according to Deutsche Bank, three-fourths of the global solar market could be “sustainable” — i.e. competitive without subsidies.

    In particular, Deutsche Bank said rooftop, local ground-mounted, and other forms of small-scale distributed solar generation are going to drive much of the growth. That’s not just because of falling equipment and installation costs, but also because of new financing options. In particular, solar power purchase agreements are allowing customers to avoid the hassles of overhead, installation, and permitting costs — one of the major barriers to distributed solar adoption. The individual customer acts as host for a third party firm that installs the solar on their property. The customer then gets the electricity at an agreed rate (usually below market value), while the firm handles installment, overhead costs, permitting, and the like. Other financing models are also rising, as are solar power cooperatives — though the question of exactly how solar generation by individuals will integrate with utilities’ business models has to be hashed out before the market can really take off.

    On the research and development end, Fraunhofer USA’s Center for Sustainable Energy Systems (CSE) is working on rooftop solar kits that can be assembled like an IKEA product and attached to a roof without drilling or infrastructure. A compact wireless system would then integrate with the local utility using a preset system. In essence: a user-friendly plug-and-play solar system that should escape the need for rooftop inspection or permitting processes. CSE just received $11.7 million from the Department of Energy to try to develop the system within 5 years.

    Now, critics of government subsidies might see Deutsche Bank’s conclusions as a case for eliminating solar’s subsidies, or that those subsidies should never have been in place to begin with. But because market prices don’t account for the economic and environmental cost of fossil fuel production, solar and other renewables are currently competing on an unfair playing field in which American fossil fuels are implicitly subsidized by half a trillion dollars per year. Subsidies are an imperfect solution to that imbalance when compared with the benefits of a carbon tax. But they’re what’s politically feasible at the moment. And given how well solar is doing in the current environment, imagine its growth if the world was actually properly pricing its carbon emissions.

    http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2013/08/09/2441061/how-asias-booming-market-heralds-a-worldwide-turnaround-for-solar/

    Thumb up 2

  8. Section8

    Personally I have no objection to alternative fuels, and if solar takes hold then great. Less reliance on countries who have a public that would like to see us vanish. The question I have is once little solar becomes BIG solar how will the left handle this? Based on past reactions to profit I have my ideas. After all the real problem is profit and I can guarantee once money starts flowing in the sun and anything that captures it will be evil. More than anything, I hope solar or any alternate fuel succeeds just to watch that happen.

    Thumb up 1

  9. stogy

    Here’s a little more data to throw into the mix. It appears that people with some particular political and financial interests really find it necessary to talk down renewables. Here’s a little more on those jobs:

    According to a 2013 analysis by the BLS, in the fourth quarter of 2011 there were 3.4 million green jobs in the United States. Overall, green jobs represented 2.6 percent of jobs in the United States, although, as shown in the previous map, individual states have higher or lower percentages based on their total state employment.

    A study performed by the Brookings Institution and Battelle found that 2.7 million people were directly employed in the “clean economy” in 2010, more than the 2.4 million employed in the fossil fuel industry.

    and this:

    The Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that direct employment in May 2012 totaled 181,580 for oil and gas extraction, 87,520 for coal mining, and 93,200 for iron and steel production. BLS doesn’t similarly classify solar or wind jobs, but reputable analysts have determined from bottom-up industry surveys that in September 2012, for example, the U.S. had 119,016 direct solar jobs (89 percent full-time, the rest at least half-time), up 27 percent in two years—more than in steel-making or coal-mining.

    And the conclusion?

    Much of the conversation on renewables is misinformed and misrepresented. And when bad news does happen, says ACORE president and retired U.S. Navy Vice Admiral Dennis McGinn, opponents of renewables are pushing it “as if it’s the only news. They are dominating the conversation through misrepresentation, exaggeration, distraction, and millions of dollars in lobbying and advertising.”

    Thumb up 3

  10. stogy

    After all the real problem is profit and I can guarantee once money starts flowing in the sun and anything that captures it will be evil.

    The point is that with the right regulatory systems and a smart grid, just about anyone and everyone can be a power producer as long as they have the basic capital to invest in solar panels and a few other bits and pieces. And the cost of installation per kw is falling very rapidly.

    Thumb up 3

  11. CM

    Seriously – you used “Think Progress” as source material? Why not just dig up an old issue of “Pravda”?

    You didn’t seem to have any issues with the “The American Interest” blog. Also, the source material is from Bloomberg and Deustche Bank.
    Which particular parts of the piece do you have an issue with? The ‘facts’, or the editorial commentary surrounding them?

    Thumb up 3

  12. CM

    Much of the conversation on renewables is misinformed and misrepresented. And when bad news does happen, says ACORE president and retired U.S. Navy Vice Admiral Dennis McGinn, opponents of renewables are pushing it “as if it’s the only news. They are dominating the conversation through misrepresentation, exaggeration, distraction, and millions of dollars in lobbying and advertising.”

    Completely correct. When the U.S. Energy Department loan guarantee system is mentioned, it’s only ever about Solyndra (and frothing at the mouth). However what’s never mentioned is that the system successfully shepherded 28 companies with various renewable energy projects, while creating over 20,000 jobs. Throw in the Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing loan program, and the total created jobs come to around 60,000. Solyndra represented only 1.3% of the portfolio. One of the program’s biggest bets was an $8.33 billion loan guarantee for a nuclear plant in Georgia.

    Let me ask again: can you imagine how much better this growth would be if the people that think government should pick winners & losers – meaning they get to choose who, works, who’s not paying too much for basic necessities, who gets wealthy, and who doesn’t – were not allowed to pull that shit?

    Alex conveniently forgets the huge subsidies fossil fuel industries have always had, and still have.

    An IMF report has revealed that “on a pre-tax basis, subsidies for petroleum products, electricity, natural gas, and coal reached $480 billion in 2011 (0.7 percent of global GDP).” Even worse, “on a post-tax basis – which also factors in the negative externalities from energy consumption – subsidies are much higher at $1.9 trillion (2.5 percent of global GDP).” The United States tops the list, with total subsidies worth $502 billion, with China a distant second, at $279 billion.

    http://www.imf.org/external/np/pp/eng/2013/012813.pdf

    IEA Chief Economist Fatih Birol…..showed global renewable subsidies to be $88 billion in 2011

    http://www.ewea.org/press-releases/detail/?tx_ttnewstt_news=2026&cHash=fb6d42b9f07c49b2ba583ea8a8c79b48

    Thumb up 2

  13. stogy

    Here’s an interesting article on a town that wants to spend 200 million of your hard-earned dollars on raising the level of the town by ten feet. They strangely feel that more storms like Sandy are coming their way. And that sea levels are likely to continue rising, putting their expensive properties underwater.

    The cost estimate of $150 million to $200 million is based on elevating Highlands 8 to 10 feet, Szulecki said. Elevating it 11 feet or more would hike the project’s cost, Szulecki said.

    Army engineers plan to spend that much to create dunes and other coastal defenses along the northern and central beaches of Ocean County. And it will cost an estimated $101 million to build and fix the dunes on the 18 miles of Long Beach Island.

    With thousands of miles of vulnerable shoreline in the U.S., it’s unclear why Highlands should be more qualified than other locations to receive hundreds of millions of dollars in federal assistance for such a project, said Rob Young, director of the Program for the Study of Developed Shorelines at Western Carolina University.

    When you look at the costs, all along the coastal areas of the US, of either doing this or abandoning properties altogether (property valuation for Highlands alone is 574 million)…. you do get some awfully big numbers. Mightn’t it be cheaper to simply cut carbon emissions?

    Thumb up 2

  14. Aussiesmurf

    I don’t understand the whole ‘Black Jesus’ thing. I mean, Jesus WAS black, or at least a hell of a lot closer to black than white. What the heck do you think people from the middle east look like?

    Thumb up 1

  15. Mississippi Yankee

    I don’t understand the whole ‘Black Jesus’ thing. I mean, Jesus WAS black,

    Is there something in the water that affect you ‘down-utter’ folks or is being deliberately obtuse some how considered to be humor in your part of the world?

    Thumb up 1

  16. Iconoclast

    I don’t understand the whole ‘Black Jesus’ thing. I mean, Jesus WAS black, or at least a hell of a lot closer to black than white. What the heck do you think people from the middle east look like?

    Lord love a duck…

    People from the Middle East look lots of different ways. Israeli Jews live in the ME, and they don’t strike me as “a hell of a lot closer to black than white” generally speaking. And Jesus was a Jew.

    Thumb up 8

  17. stogy

    Al Gore is the key-master. The Corrupt Scientists are the gate-keepers.

    Wait. You lost me here… isn’t a gate keeper the same thing as a key master?

    Thumb up 0

  18. Section8

    Lord love a duck…

    It’s the brilliance on display from our mentally superior friends from across the pond.

    Almost certainly Jesus wasn’t blond hair blue eyed, but religious or not, you’d think those who are so well endowed with intellect would know the variations of the races in that region.

    As far as the Black Jesus regarding Obama, if one can’t even figure out what that is all about then let them not get it.

    Thumb up 4

  19. CM

    Wait. You lost me here… isn’t a gate keeper the same thing as a key master?

    You’ve clearly been brainwashed by the lamestream media.

    Thumb up 1

  20. Iconoclast

    You ever seen an Ethiopian Jew?

    I may have, what of it? Unless you’re trying to argue that Jesus was Ethiopian, I’m not sure what you’re point is.

    Thumb up 6

  21. stogy

    I may have, what of it? Unless you’re trying to argue that Jesus was Ethiopian

    No more than I would argue that Jesus was a European Ashkenazy Jew…

    Thumb up 0

  22. stogy

    Er… let me go through this one point at a time. I will type slow so you don’t have to read too fast:

    You said:

    Israeli Jews live in the ME, and they don’t strike me as “a hell of a lot closer to black than white” generally speaking. And Jesus was a Jew.

    Then I said:

    You ever seen an Ethiopian Jew?

    What I meant by this is that many Israeli Jews are Ethiopian Jews, extracted from Ethiopia during the catastrophic famine of the 1980s. More than 120,000 emigrated, and had children there. There are now lots of Ethiopian Jews in Israel. Just for your information, they have suffered appalling discrimination (including forced sterilisation) in the apartheid state that is Israel today.

    There are also Cochin Jews, who have emigrated from India (having been there since the 6th century BC but more arrived in India after the destruction of the second temple in 70AD). They also look more than a little different to the white Europeans you seem to think all Jews look like.

    So if an Israeli-born Jew who’s parents came from Ethiopia can be black, or a second generation South Indian Jew from Cochin can be very dark brown, or a converted Jewish South African from the Soweto can be dark, or an Israeli Ashkenazi Jew can be white, then we cannot say that Israelis are certainly closer to being white, or black either for that matter. Your observation that Jesus was more white than black is therefore fact free, and rather prejudicial. Jesus probably looked more like a current day Palestinian than anything else (quite a lot of the Israeli Jews who stayed in the East Med ended up converting to Islam).

    So you have no point whatsoever — glad we cleared that up.

    So you have no point whatsoever — glad we cleared that up.

    Thumb up 1

  23. stogy

    Two points for clarification:

    (quite a lot of the Israeli Jews who stayed in the East Med ended up converting to Islam)

    I should have said descendants of the Jewish people living in the Roman Provinces of Palestine and Judea who didn’t leave after the various exiles. They weren’t Israelis then.

    Your observation that Jesus was more white than black

    It was an implied observation, not an actual observation.

    Thumb up 1

  24. Xetrov
    Wait. You lost me here… isn’t a gate keeper the same thing as a key master?

    You’ve clearly been brainwashed by the lamestream media.

    I thought he was possessed by Zul.

    Thumb up 0

  25. Iconoclast

    Your observation that Jesus was more white than black is therefore fact free, and rather prejudicial.

    I suppose it would be if I had made such an observation, but I didn’t. Let me type this slowly for you so you don’t have to read so fast…

    Aussiesmurf made the absolute claim:

    Jesus WAS black, or at least a hell of a lot closer to black than white.

    Aussiesmurf, August 11, 2013 7:04 PM

    My observation (emphasis added)…

    People from the Middle East look lots of different ways. Israeli Jews live in the ME, and they don’t strike me as “a hell of a lot closer to black than white” generally speaking.

    Iconoclast, August 11, 2013 9:00 PM

    ..was simply intended to cast doubt on the aforementioned absolute claim. It was a general observation, not an absolute claim. Lots of Israeli Jews are white, and many are descendants of the ancient tribes of Judah, according to Biblical scholars.

    So, to reiterate, I am not making any absolute claims regarding skin color. I am simply observing that Aussiesmurf’s claim is by no means a given, although you liberals do seem to love advancing that particular narrative, as you have just now done.

    Thumb up 6

  26. Iconoclast

    It was an implied observation, not an actual observation.

    It was neither actual nor implied. I have no idea what color Jesus was, and I certain won’t make any absoliute claims one way or the other. It ain’t important, unless one has some kind of agenda to advance.

    Thumb up 6

  27. CM

    ..was simply intended to cast doubt on the aforementioned absolute claim.

    And yet in the media thread you’re doing the reverse – you’ve been busy trying hard to suggest I made an absolute claim when I didn’t.

    It ain’t important, unless one has some kind of agenda to advance.

    The use of the term “Black Jesus” is part of an ongoing attempt to advance an agenda. Questioning the term can be done without advancing any alternative agenda.

    Thumb up 1

  28. stogy

    Israeli Jews live in the ME

    The implication of this was that Israeli Jews are white Ashkenazy Jews – because it was your argument against Jesus being black. There would have been no point in making the statement otherwise. So yes, you were implying that Israeli Jews are white.

    I think you should apologise to all non-white Israeli Jews, quite frankly.

    Thumb up 1

  29. Iconoclast

    The implication of this was that Israeli Jews are white Ashkenazy Jews – because it was your argument against Jesus being black. There would have been no point in making the statement otherwise. So yes, you were implying that Israeli Jews are white.

    I suppose it would appear that way if you adopt the utterly false dichotomy that “they don’t strike me as ‘a hell of a lot closer to black than white’ generally speaking” absolutely means the opposite, “they do strike me as “a hell of a lot closer to white than black” generally speaking”. But it doesn’t. It’s a false dichotomy.

    That being said, some are white, like it or lump it.

    I cannot help but be reminded of CM’s sanctimonious pontification:

    …you interpret everything [your opponent] says through your little ideological lens, and conclude the most negative thing possible, often to fit some existing predetermined mindset…

    CM, August 6, 2013 11:29 PM — “This is nothing new people…”

    Funny how CM doesn’t seem to notice when his fellow traveler appears to do exactly that.

    Regardless of how things are done elsewhere on planet Earth, here in the States, the term “black” is generally understood to be referring to or describing a person of African descent. East Indians tend to have rather dark skin. In fact, their pigmentation can easily rival that of people of African descent, but we generally don’t refer to Indians as “black” people. Same for native Americans or native Hawaiians. No, again, “black” is typically understood to mean “African”, for better or worse. I wouldn’t be at all surprised if this were conveniently not the case in places like Australia or New Zealand or England.

    Hell, in order to challenge my point, stogy even had to bring up Ethiopian Jews. Last time I checked, Ethiopia was located in Africa. Well, hell yes, a Jew of African descent will tend to look “black”/African, even if relocated to Israel. That’s so patently obvious that it seems absurd that it’s even worth mentioning, let alone being a main point of discussion. A Jew of Asian descent will likewise look Asian. But Jesus was not of African descent. He was born in Bethlehem, and grew up in Nazareth, neither of which is in Africa. That is why I originally dismissed stogy’s asinine “point”.

    Many people in the Middle East simply do have a lighter complexion than someone we typically associate with “black”. The Shah of Iran, Saddam Hussein, the Afghan girl who was famously on the cover of NatGeo, Menachem Begin, the list goes on and on.

    I think you should apologise to all non-white Israeli Jews, quite frankly.

    Well, I’m sure you do, but quite frankly, I don’t give a rat’s ass what you think on that score. Tell me, since Aussiesmurf basically claimed outright that all, yes all people of the Middle East look “a hell of a lot closer to black than white”, why doesn’t he owe an apology to Middle Eastern people of light complexion?

    Jesus WAS black, or at least a hell of a lot closer to black than white. What the heck do you think people from the middle east look like?

    Aussiesmurf, August 11, 2013 7:04 PM

    No qualifiers of any kind whatsoever. I do use qualifiers, even if they are either mocked or ignored. So stogy, when are you going to demand an apology from Aussiesmurf? Hell, why don’t you owe them an apology for even dredging them up in a lame-ass attempt to score cheap racism points in the first place? Especially given their ultimate irrelevance to the discussion?

    Thumb up 8

  30. Iconoclast

    And yet in the media thread you’re doing the reverse – you’ve been busy trying hard to suggest I made an absolute claim when I didn’t.

    Well, again, I find myself wondering whether you actually can read and comprehend written English — it certainly doesn’t look like it…

    Thumb up 8

  31. stogy

    Here’s a reconstruction using forensic anthropology:

    Click to see the real Jesus!

    “The fact that he probably looked a great deal more like a darker-skinned Semite than westerners are used to seeing him pictured is a reminder of his universality,” says Charles D. Hackett, director of Episcopal studies at the Candler School of Theology in Atlanta. “And [it is] a reminder of our tendency to sinfully appropriate him in the service of our cultural values.”

    Remember also that he wouldn’t have spent a lot of time indoors, being a carpenter and all.

    Thumb up 1

  32. Iconoclast

    Click to see the real Jesus!

    The “real” Jesus? That’s a rather extraordinary claim, and as the late Carl Sagan famously said, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. The cited article admits that “nowhere in the New Testament is Jesus described, nor have any drawings of him ever been uncovered. There is the additional problem of having neither a skeleton nor other bodily remains to probe for DNA. In the absence of evidence, our images of Jesus have been left to the imagination of artists” (Emphasis added).

    Now, if you’re simply saying that Jesus had darker skin than, say, Willem Dafoe (who actually played Jesus in “The Last Temptation of Christ”), you won’t get any argument from me, and while one might argue that the cited article support the “Jesus WAS black, or at least a hell of a lot closer to black than white” claim, it still contains a lot of speculation, and it utterly fails to disprove the “they don’t strike me as ‘a hell of a lot closer to black than white’ generally speaking” observation. The depicted image falls somewhere in the vast grey area in between, and ain’t necessarily “closer” to either extreme. Furthermore, nothing in the article addresses my claim that many people in the Middle East do indeed have a lighter complexion, nor are my examples addressed. I can post random images of the Iran Protests of 2009, or of Israeli men or women, from Google Images, and again, generally speaking, the people therein do not appear at all “a hell of a lot closer to black than white”, at least not to me eyes.

    YMMV of course…

    Thumb up 4

  33. Seattle Outcast

    I don’t understand the whole ‘Black Jesus’ thing. I mean, Jesus WAS black, or at least a hell of a lot closer to black than white. What the heck do you think people from the middle east look like?

    They aren’t “black” – and as pointed out earlier, “black” in US culture does not include ethnic peoples from north Africa along the Med coast or people from the ME. It would be the same as saying that Italians, Greeks, Spaniards and Turks are “black” just because they don’t look like Swedes.

    Thumb up 2

  34. AlexInCT *

    Speak of wops like me being called black. I have been called black before, but not because of my skin, and it has been by impressed ladies. I could go all “You womenz are all so racist” on them, but instead I just thank them and show them I also have crazy skillz…..

    Bet you don’t have these problems CM… :)

    Thumb up 3

  35. CM

    Speak of wops like me being called black. I have been called black before, but not because of my skin, and it has been by impressed ladies. I could go all “You womenz are all so racist” on them, but instead I just thank them and show them I also have crazy skillz…..

    Bet you don’t have these problems CM… :)

    Gosh, I’m just in shock that as well as being amazing at everything you ALSO claim to have a large cock. Oh no, hang on, I’m not.
    Personally, I’ve never felt a need to talk about size.

    Thumb up 1