posted
To you Obama is the first "black" president. To me, he's the 44th president of the United States.
He's half white and half black. I don't view African heritage as some kind of taint that overpowers and erases the other genes. Democrat Georgia segregation laws defined a negro as anyone who had 1/16th of that nigger gene in them.
Posts: 1495 | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
In the eyes of mainstream America, malanthrop, half black counts as black. That is changing but it's still true, and as much as you far-right conservatives would like to chant repetitively that America is color-blind, it just isn't true.
Obama is the first black President, among other things. But that was a nice subject change you just attempted. You're consistent on that if not effective.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
You are correct, the left is far from color blind. The left love's to categorize people...gay, lesbian, woman, black, hispanic, trangender, whatever.
My great, great, great, grandmother on my mother's side was black. The blacks in my old unit called me "Two Percent". To them I was white and they laughed when I shared my family heritage with them. Could I have been the first black president? Maybe if I was a genetic throwback and looked black I could be? Your definition of "black" is based upon the most racist position of all......appearance. Obama could've ended up looking white with straight hair.
posted
For a man who's so well off, you apparently don't understand simple counting very well, there being a substantial difference between two and fifty.
Obama didn't end up looking white with straight hair, which is why in the eyes of most in America, he is considered black. I know you, in your heroically conservative-minded tolerance of anyone and anything, who doesn't see color, gender, or creed at all, ever, may not think this way...but most people aren't like that. That includes most Republicans.
Well, I'm getting tired of baiting you-should've been tired of it an hour ago, but sometimes you're just so obnoxious I can't bring myself to summon my apathy. Go on telling us how great Republicans are, and how stupid and treacherous the vast majority of minorities are for not belonging to it!
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I respect liberals who honestly believe in their position even if I disagree with them. Difference of opinion in a democracy is good. Minority conservatives aren't attacked for their positions but for being a traitor to their protected class. I can't imagine a politician telling me I'm a traitor to my race for voting this/that way. Minorities in our nation are told this by the left all the time.
If blacks are the most persecuted minority in our country, how do you think the 5% of blacks who voted against Obama feel? Conservative minorities are the minority of the minority and are persecuted worst of all.
Posts: 1495 | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think at this point about 80% of malanthrop's replies could be responded to with "That's great, but how on earth is that related to my post?"
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: Because I'm trying to think of what, exactly, he could have been attempting to persuade people of with those remarks, and coming up with only a few guesses. Some of them are dubious at best.
I can't disagree, I just don't find this particular case as dubious as the McCain case we were talking about. In my opinion, this is mildly odd and embarrassing, while the McCain flap was a real lapse in judgment.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Geraine: I lived in Brazil, and I will say that I never caught any hint of racism. White people were called "Branca" or "Branco" and black people were called "Negra" or "Negro". I knew two guys that went by the names "Negao" (Big Black, "Brancao" (Big White) That is just how people are described down there.
Yeah, haven't we seen you float this idea before? Why do people come on this board and make some statement, see it argued over for 3 pages, leave, and then come back a year later and offer up the same turkey? Just curious. What's the fun there?
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: You didn't see the memo? Republicans aren't allowed to use "Democratic" anymore when describing Democrats, as that sounds far too nice.
"What, they're Democratic? Why, they must love Democracy and freedom then!"
We can't have that. It's hard to call them America hating commies when their name implies they might actually appreciate or represent democracy.
Wow. I mean really? Really? Lyyrhawn, are you seriously suggesting that because I said Democrat party instead of Democratic party that I was implying all the nonsense you posted about Democrats being America hating commies?
He's not saying that, he's mocking you for being a sheep led by people who actually *do* think that. That's why you picked up that little piece of Republican jargon and started using it, right? Or else why do you say it?
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: But, regardless of my tongue-in-cheek portrayal there, there HAS been a concerted effort in the last few years by major Republican nation figures to refer to the Democratic party as the Democrat party. You can check editorials if you want to see what the pundits think of it, but that's my personal opinion as to why. It's a rhetorical trick, and nothing more.
That isn't why I did it and I will call it the Democratic party from now on
Posts: 1918 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
My brother in law is half black. He's response to the half question was that half really doesn't exist in America. You are either black or white. People who are racist and are going to judge you on your skin color aren't going to ask for your genealogy first. They also don't care if your black relative was a slave or an immigrant for Africa. As long as you look black, you get to experience the whole being black in the US perspective.
Posts: 2223 | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Geraine: I lived in Brazil, and I will say that I never caught any hint of racism. White people were called "Branca" or "Branco" and black people were called "Negra" or "Negro". I knew two guys that went by the names "Negao" (Big Black, "Brancao" (Big White) That is just how people are described down there.
Yeah, haven't we seen you float this idea before? Why do people come on this board and make some statement, see it argued over for 3 pages, leave, and then come back a year later and offer up the same turkey? Just curious. What's the fun there?
Have I brought this up before? I don't remember. My apologize if I did. I'll do a search to see the responses from this post a year ago.
Posts: 1937 | Registered: Nov 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote: But, regardless of my tongue-in-cheek portrayal there, there HAS been a concerted effort in the last few years by major Republican nation figures to refer to the Democratic party as the Democrat party. You can check editorials if you want to see what the pundits think of it, but that's my personal opinion as to why. It's a rhetorical trick, and nothing more.
That isn't why I did it and I will call it the Democratic party from now on
I don't think anyone here thought you did, but it is funny where it crops up now and then. Things like that have a way of spreading without the knowledge of some of the people who do it.
BTW, I appreciate MOST of the comments in this thread, even when I don't agree with them. It is such a sensitive subject that it is nice to hear what people think about it wihtout flying off the handle.
Other than calling a modern political figure a house nigger, that is.
While I hope Mal comes back safe and does a lot of good while in Haiti, the fact that he will be representing the US in a country that is 95% black scares the hell out of me.
Perhaps that type of situation is why we are not views so well in other countries. We are so divided ourselves on these issues that you never know what we are going to say or do.
Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by scholarette: My brother in law is half black. He's response to the half question was that half really doesn't exist in America. You are either black or white. People who are racist and are going to judge you on your skin color aren't going to ask for your genealogy first. They also don't care if your black relative was a slave or an immigrant for Africa. As long as you look black, you get to experience the whole being black in the US perspective.
Let me begin my post by saying that I don't think we ought to self-identify, in this day and age, on the basis of what racists might think. I'm not saying you, or your brother in law said that, but I wanted to get it out of the way.
I can't speak from personal experience, but I highly doubt that dealing with white racists accounts for the "the whole being black in the US perspective." A significant portion, to be sure, but not everything. I'm sorry your brother-in-law feels the way he does, but his experince, while perhaps broadly true, is not universal.
My father is Japanese, and my mother white. When people ask me what I am, that's usually what I say. It's the shortest possible way I can think of to accurately answer what they're asking. One key difference between a man that's half white and half black and myself is that I'm very obviously mixed. He might only rarely have to answer the question, because it might be only rarely asked and people who might otherwise have asked did not think to do so. This does not necessarily mean that mainstream America thinks that mixed-black is equivalent to black. It simply means that mainstream America is unable to tell the difference at a glance.
With Obama specifically, there is very good reason to think of him, by default, as mixed, rather than black. He was raised in Hawaii, then Indonesia, rather than, say, inner-city Baltimore or Chicago. His primary caregivers were white, and according to his autobiography, many of his friends were black. In his speech on race he talked about his racial background like this: "I am the son of a black man from Kenya, and a white woman from Kansas." That reminds me, uncannily, of how I explain my own background.
I am keenly aware of my race(s) because they're written, almost literally, on my face. I submit that Obama is just as aware, although he is less obviously biracial, because of the context(s) in which he grew up.
I further submit that thinking of Obama as mixed race is helpful, though not necessary, in understanding his presidency. I see in him some things I consider strengths in myslef: his willingness to listen, to seek a middle ground between extremes, and his skills at mediation. I also see the weakness that can occur when compromise is taken to far, as I am prone to do. If liberals are wondering why Obama just doesn't seem to be carrying their agenda like they thought he would, this is goes a long way toward explaining why. I also hope that if Republicans come to understand this, they will learn that they can trust Obama's offers - he sincerely wants everyone to agree.
Perhaps mainstream America can't or doesn't care to tell the difference between black and half-black. That doesn't, in any way, make Obama simply black. It just makes mainstream America ignorant, which isn't the worst thing in the world. But I would certainly hesitate before labeling anything, or anyone even more so, based on appeal to that ignorance.
Posts: 2907 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:I was always irritated by the term "house nigger"as it was usually applied to "well spoken" (non-negro dialect) educated conservative blacks. I now realize it's a perfectly appropriate term and is more fitting to Al Sharpton defending Harry Reid.
You keep saying this, so I might as well bring this up here.
First: You are the only person I know of who frequently uses this term. If you'd like to define it as you have here, please do. And while you do, continue to insist that you're "not a racist" even though you think a racial slur is an appropriate label for another person.
Second: Black conservatives don't need your defense. You claim - repeatedly - that blacks suffer oppression for taking conservative positions; it doesn't seem like you've given much thought to the issue. I doubt you care about it except as a convenient line of attack at the so-called "Democrat Party."
You say that the blacks are called "traitors" For voting for the GOP. Meanwhile, Republicans insist that liberal policies "keep blacks poor," as if by voting for Democrats they are sabotaging any chance for upward mobility. If that does not imply that they are somehow "race traitors," I'm not sure what does.
Third: I find it ironic that Colin Powell makes your list of blacks-but-not-really, particularly since so many conservatives still accuse him of endorsing Obama simply because of his race alone. It's as if he's just another man when you agree with him, but just another black sheep when you don't. And Condi Rice? What, you think helping to craft Bush's War in Iraq had nothing to do with her unpopularity among liberals?
Further: you continue to repeat the term "color-blindness" as if its some sort of ideal. There is a belief system that states that the differences between various cultural groups need to be taken in context -- and that they shouldn't matter in most contexts. That absolutely is not the same as pretending that they don't exist. You've chosen ignorance in place of understanding, and you wear it as a badge of honor. I understand why you do it; it's so much easier and doesn't require much thought. Most people wouldn't be so proud of it.
Perhaps that's why you feel so comfortable speaking of things you know nothing about. Poorly examined, disconnected talking points only get you so far.
quote:I was always irritated by the term "house nigger"as it was usually applied to "well spoken" (non-negro dialect) educated conservative blacks. I now realize it's a perfectly appropriate term and is more fitting to Al Sharpton defending Harry Reid.
You keep saying this, so I might as well bring this up here.
First: You are the only person I know of who frequently uses this term. If you'd like to define it as you have here, please do. And while you do, continue to insist that you're "not a racist" even though you think a racial slur is an appropriate label for another person.
Second: Black conservatives don't need your defense. You claim - repeatedly - that blacks suffer oppression for taking conservative positions; it doesn't seem like you've given much thought to the issue. I doubt you care about it except as a convenient line of attack at the so-called "Democrat Party."
You say that the blacks are called "traitors" For voting for the GOP. Meanwhile, Republicans insist that liberal policies "keep blacks poor," as if by voting for Democrats they are sabotaging any chance for upward mobility. If that does not imply that they are somehow "race traitors," I'm not sure what does.
Third: I find it ironic that Colin Powell makes your list of blacks-but-not-really, particularly since so many conservatives still accuse him of endorsing Obama simply because of his race alone. It's as if he's just another man when you agree with him, but just another black sheep when you don't. And Condi Rice? What, you think helping to craft Bush's War in Iraq had nothing to do with her unpopularity among liberals?
Further: you continue to repeat the term "color-blindness" as if its some sort of ideal. There is a belief system that states that the differences between various cultural groups need to be taken in context -- and that they shouldn't matter in most contexts. That absolutely is not the same as pretending that they don't exist. You've chosen ignorance in place of understanding, and you wear it as a badge of honor. I understand why you do it; it's so much easier and doesn't require much thought. Most people wouldn't be so proud of it.
Perhaps that's why you feel so comfortable speaking of things you know nothing about. Poorly examined, disconnected talking points only get you so far.
--j_k
I agree wholeheartedly with most of your points, but I would like to point out one thing. During the election, I believe it was either Jackson or Sharpton, I can't recall which, who questioned if Obama was "black enough". I may be wrong in my interpretation, but that sounds almost racist to me.
Posts: 73 | Registered: Nov 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Whites don't have a monopoly on racism, that's for sure. Sounded like they were having the flip side of Harry Reid's comments to me.
Which is part of why I don't have an issue with him at this point. He was honest, and was speaking about difficult topics like race and inclusion in America.
He was tactless, but that doesn't mean he was wrong.
Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Laugh]](graemlins/laugh.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
![[Cry]](graemlins/cry.gif)
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
![[Wall Bash]](graemlins/wallbash.gif)
