There have been a lot of reactions to the video of Michael Plfeger mocking Hillary Clinton as a racist. Some have noted that it was, in fact, "white people" who handed her a loss in Iowa. Some have spoken about what it means to see the partner of "our first black President" so quickly and easily accused of being a racially entitled bigot.

And some, of course, have talked about what this means for Obama, who has hurriedly resigned from the church he attended for two decades.* (I'm sure this stuff just started happening the moment people started paying attention. That's why the crowd was shocked at the rhetoric. What, you say they were cheering instead, as if it were something they heard often and heartily agreed with.)

(* Interestingly, the Times doesn't even mention Plfeger's name in their coverage.)

But I didn't hear my own reactions:

(a) The oddest thing that struck me is that this German-looking man, from the Northern US, was speaking to a black audience in what appeared to be a parody of a southern black accent. Was very creepy -- sounded like some other racist minstrel show. But the audience loved his faux accent, apparently.

(b) He was saying that people are punished for the sins of their forefathers -- the old idea of "blood guilt". I thought we were past that.

(c) I was under the impression that Christians believed that we can't atone ourselves for our sins -- that it was Jesus's sacrifice that forgives sins. This fellow seems to believe something else: that giving up one's 401K (and asking who to support them when they retire?) is what saves people from sin. Salvation though works.

(d) I was under the impression that American prosperity was mainly due to her economic system of allowing people to invest and trade as they wished. But now I am asked believe that slavery is solely or mainly responsible. But if so, then why did the North have a booming economy? And what about England?

One learns so many interesting things during election season!