sic semper tyrannis

“With reports from the Potomac Primary that Obama swept yesterday that he had garnered close to 90% of black votes, he has become the black candidate. While he also has the support of a lot of others, especially the young voters who typically get enthused during the primary season and then don’t vote in the general election, this isn’t the way he started last year — as a candidate who happens to be black.

Given the “we-are-all-victims” mentality of the Democratic Party, they will accuse even the staunchest supporter of quotas (a/k/a affirmative action) and political correctness, such as the Clintons, of being racist should they bring up the inconvenient notion that Obama has become the minority candidate.

A bit of a storm ensued when the governor of Pennsylvania, Ed Rendell, Democrat had the temerity to tell the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

“You’ve got conservative whites here, and I think there are some whites who are probably not ready to vote for an African-American candidate.” (via FoxNews)

I don’t know that taking race into consideration would make one a “conservative.” By that standard, Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson should be awarded lifetime achievement awards from the Heritage Foundation. Oh, that’s right. I forgot to add “whites.” When a Democrat talks about “conservative whites” in the context of race, he surely means knuckle-dragging racists.

Based on an informal sample of some of our friends who are Democrats, and who are white, there may be more than just conservative whites who react negatively against the notion of a candidate who is so thoroughly supported by one racial group. Time will tell, and I suspect that there will be a significant number of white Democrats and independents who are not racists but who will be pressured into saying they support Obama. But not voting for him.

Whether they will vote for John McCain remains to be seen.

This is really not too surprising: Dutch Catholics can’t call the penitential season before Easter Lent. From the Telegraph (UK):

Dutch Catholics have re-branded the Lent fast as the “Christian Ramadan” in an attempt to appeal to young people who are more likely to know about Islam than Christianity.

The Catholic charity Vastenaktie, which collects for the Third World across the Netherlands during the Lent period, is concerned that the Christian festival has become less important for the Dutch over the last generation.

The image of the Catholic Lent must be polished. The fact that we use a Muslim term is related to the fact that Ramadan is a better-known concept among young people than Lent,” said Vastenaktie Director, Martin Van der Kuil.

The Christian “brand” shows great market weakness; need to pump it up in terms more familiar to the young ‘uns. Unfortunately, this is no surprise, given the continuing secularization of Western Europe among those who formerly had been Christian. More accurately, those who formerly had been born into Christian families.

While no one may know with any certainty what is in the hearts of Dutch Christians, by the usual measure of church attendance, Holland, along with most of the rest of Western Europe, is now a Christian desert. Secular. And this has created a vacuum of sorts, a vacuum of faith. Which has been filled by Muslim immigrants.

Both as a matter of faith, and as a matter of sheer demographics, the future of Europe is beginning to look more and more Islamic. Whether Bat Ye’or’s book, Eurabia, is a rallying cry to action before it is too late, or the ravings of an Islamophobe, there is gathering evidence that Islam is having a far-too-great influence on Europe.

“Christian Ramadan” is just one datum, however egregious it sounds to actual Christians. It is time that Christians reclaim what is ours.