from cone's npr interview with terry gross:

"[black liberation is]a theology that sees god primarily as concerned with the poor and the weak in society and since this theology comes out of the black community we call it black liberation theology, but it's not just for black people in a narrow sense of that term it is for black people in the sense that it focuses on the concerns of blacks who are living and who are voiceless in this society, that makes it blt.

but it is concern about the gospel for everybody and if everybody is for the gospel in this society then they are for the poor and the weak and if you are for the poor and the weak you also are concerned about the liberation of black people, too.

so black theology is an understanding of the gospel which sees justice for the poor as the very heart of what the christian gospel is about and the very heart of what god is doing in this world. god is taking sides with those who are voiceless and weak and he is empowering them to know that they were not made for slavery, not made for exploitation, but was made for freedom like everybody else in the world.

(martin luther) king gave black theology its christian identity and in that sense i'm a minister in the african methodist episcopal church. now malcolm x, who was not a christian, as you say, he gave black theology its black identity. and this is important, too, because we were black before we were christian. and in a white supremacist society like america has been, 246 years of slavery, 100 years of segregation and lynching, in a society where white domination is so powerful on the minority group and where black has been defined as evil and as negative then we have to turn that understanding of black on its head and see ourselves as loving ourselves and not hating ourselves. so black is black self-esteem. it says, while king told us to love the enemy--which is right. i think we should love the enemy because if you are going to be a christian you have to love the neighbor. but. before you can love anybody, you have to love yourself. so i wanted to bring martin and malcolm together so we can fight for justice as martin king said, but love ourselves as malcolm x said. and as malcolm said the worst crime white people have created is to teach black people to hate themselves. that's why we kill each other. we kill each other in the ghettos and etc. so who we don't love is ourselves. and so black theology is bringing martin and malcolm together, teaching us how to be both unapologetically black and christian at the same time."

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=89236116

As quoted by you.

"All white men are responsible for white oppression. It is much too easy to say, "Racism is not my fault," or "I am not responsible for the country's inhumanity to the black man...But insofar as white do-gooders tolerate and sponsor racism in their educational institutions, their political, economic and social structures, their churches, and in every other aspect of American life, they are directly responsible for racism...Racism is possible because whites are indifferent to suffering and patient with cruelty."

I think you could take that statement, change a few words and it would be equally true in relation to gender. Men are, by and large, indifferent to the sexism that women face. So what? Why is this a bad statement to make? I think it's true.

I think Obama's central message is unity, and that's why he has been successful. But the flipside to that unity is a legacy of hatred and division, which the press has chosen to examine with a microscope. Okay, so let's discuss it. I read Cone's statements and I'm comfortable with them because I know he's right. Racism is a real problem in America. To be American and to be a patriot you have to face that. That's what I think. There is nothing more patriotic than staring at the flaws of your country, owning up to them and moving past them. Why is the knee-jerk reaction of Joan Walsh and company to hate and repudiate the messenger? I want Obama to be president exactly because I believe it is the destiny of America to overcome these wounds. That is who we are.

There is a presupposition that Hillary SHOULD be winning the primaries. For heaven's sake, why? Say what you will about Americans, we dislike empire, and that is exactly to what Hillary aspires. It's not that she is a winning candidate stalled by bad decisions. She is an uninspiring candidate competing against a truly hopeful candidate, who is running on the promise of a better tomorrow and a more unified country.

Not that I exactly blame her for the mistakes of her husband, but the return of the Clinton administration does not exactly inspire me. And why should it?

"Suspicions have been raised that Hillary is holding out for a VP position with Barack. I am curious what Salon and its readers have to say about that."

Are you kidding? Are you trying to start a bar-room brawl? She would have to be actually contrite for that spot, and I don't know that she's got it in her after all that race baiting.

I would like to draw reader's attention to the PHOTO. How many people think she looks like your mom telling you to clean your room?

"I'm very disappointed in you, Indiana. I thought you could do better than this."

But then, to be fair, is that the shot that the photographer and his editor vetted? Or was that just the face she was making all night? Hard to say.