Should we consider Obama white?

[Alonzo]

This isn't so much about Obama himself, though I'm using him as an example. He's half black, yet everything I see on him refers to him as "black". The problem is he's half white to, yet I see no one referring to him as "white". The same thing happens with Tiger Woods, though he has a few more things thrown in.

Now yes, you could argue that "well, they look black!", but that doesn't really explain it. After all Mariah Carey is black enough to be invited to perform at BET events.

So why don't we refer to these people as "half white"? Or simply "white" instead of "black"? It seems that there are still remnants of the old "one drop" rule in society.

Sure we could just refer to them as people, but I don't want to be overly optimistic.

[Go Fish]

Sounds like a democrat issue. Jesse Jackson says that he isn't black enough. It's beyond me why it even matters, but go ahead with your racist discussion.
All I know is that he isn't even qualified to be a senator.

[4Reaganomics]

This isn't so much about Obama himself, though I'm using him as an example. He's half black, yet everything I see on him refers to him as "black". The problem is he's half white to, yet I see no one referring to him as "white". The same thing happens with Tiger Woods, though he has a few more things thrown in.

Now yes, you could argue that "well, they look black!", but that doesn't really explain it. After all Mariah Carey is black enough to be invited to perform at BET events.

So why don't we refer to these people as "half white"? Or simply "white" instead of "black"? It seems that there are still remnants of the old "one drop" rule in society.

Sure we could just refer to them as people, but I don't want to be overly optimistic.


This goes all the way back to hypodescent rule

[NortheastCynic]

We should consider him a liberal Senator from Illinois that promises a very vaguely defined notion of change.

-NC

[Elrathin]

You mean we should consider him McCain NC?

[NortheastCynic]

For all intents and purposes.

-NC

[MrHappy]

Mariah Carey's black? Huh.


Oh wait...

One day a zebra dies and goes to heaven, and when he meets God the zebra asks, "I've been wondering something my entire life. Am I a white zebra with black stripes, or am I a black zebra with white stripes?"

To which God simply replied, "You are what you are."

Still puzzled, the zebra trots off to his new place in zebra heaven, and along the way he meets St. Peter. "Excuse me, St. Peter, but I still have a question. I asked God if I was a white zebra with black stripes, or a black zebra with white stripes. And He only said, "You are what you are." "So what am I?"

To which St. Peter replied, "Well, there you have it."

"Beg pardon?" Asked the zebra. "Am I a white..."

"Ah, I see. You are white zebra with black stripes, of course. Does that answer your question?"

Still a little confounded, the zebra then asks, "Well yes, thank you. But how was I to know..."

"Because, if you were a black zebra with white stripes, He would have said, "Yo is what yo is!"

[PatrickHenry]

Obama is a mixed-race person.

I like that... I live in a town of mixed-race persons, my daughters are mixed-race, this island, this state are mixed-race.

The United States is, more and more, mixed-race.

If people want to self-identify with one of their ethnicities of descent, fine. Or more than one is fine, too.

I hope the US becomes more and more a place where a person's ethnicity is unremarkable, except as a topic of casual conversation.

[brien]

I heard a child describe Obama as looking like "Curious George" but this isn't pc b/c CG is a monkey. Out of the mouths of babes...This may be amusing to some, but it's not relevant. Same as Obama's skin color is not relevant.

I think PH is moving towards what is happening in the US. See this link.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/essays/february98/rodriguez_2-18.html

RICHARD RODRIGUEZ, Pacific News Service: Everywhere America is browning. Los Angeles is our largest brown city, California the largest brown state.
More than black and white.

Brown is moving West to East, South to North. Brown terrifies the skinhead in Colorado, bewilders the African-American historian. When President Clinton named John Hope Franklin to direct a national conversation on race relations, Professor Franklin was quick to insist the unfinished business of America, he said, is black and white. It is, at least, an irony of history that an African-American historian would end up arguing for the centrality of the black and white dialectic. For generations, white racists denied African-Americans the possibility of brown. The Ku Klux Klan was infuriated by the idea of brown: Brown, the color of family secrets, illicit passion; brown, the shade of love, and of drawn shades.

To deny the possibility of Brown, white racists concocted the one-drop theory, as it was called. Its aim was to keep the African slave a slave. Regardless of how light-skinned, how brown you may be, regardless of how racially mixed, you remained African if you carried a single drop of African blood. In fact, America was never just white and black. From the first day that African slaves were brought to these shores against their will there was a complicating third race: The Indian.

There will come a day in the US where there will be no color distinction, if we survive this experiment in human relations.

[Athena]

This isn't so much about Obama himself, though I'm using him as an example. He's half black, yet everything I see on him refers to him as "black". The problem is he's half white to, yet I see no one referring to him as "white". The same thing happens with Tiger Woods, though he has a few more things thrown in.

Now yes, you could argue that "well, they look black!", but that doesn't really explain it. After all Mariah Carey is black enough to be invited to perform at BET events.

So why don't we refer to these people as "half white"? Or simply "white" instead of "black"? It seems that there are still remnants of the old "one drop" rule in society.

Sure we could just refer to them as people, but I don't want to be overly optimistic.


I think you make a good point. I have a friend who had child with a Black man, and his birth certificate did not have the choice mulato, which means both Black and White. The hospital people insisted on registering him as Black because his appearence was slightly that of a person of color. This was devastating to my friend who feels like his birth certificate writes her out of his life. She was the sole parent and is White, and his birth certificate doesn't recognize her race in any way. As though her son were of different tribe and not really hers.

We do need to correct the problem our racism has created and a varity of terms for mixed races could be helpful. We need a language of truth, acceptence and tolerance.

Mulatto:

NOUN :1. A person having one white and one Black parent. 2. A person of mixed white and Black ancestry. Inflected forms: pl. —tos or —toes
ETYMOLOGY: Spanish mulato, small mule, person of mixed race, mulatto, from mulo, mule, from Old Spanish, from Latin mulus.



Other names I'm sure many of you MixedFolks have heard:
Creole: 1.) A person of mixed Black and European ancestry who speaks a creolized language, especially one based on French or Spanish. 2.) A Black slave born in the Americas as opposed to one brought from Africa.
Metisse: 1.) The offspring of a white person and an American Indian. 2.) The offspring of a white person and a quadroon; an octoroon.
Biracial: Of, for, or consisting of members of two races or combining two races.
Multiracial: Made up of, involving, or acting on behalf of various races.
Interracial: Relating to, involving, or representing different races; involving or existing between two or more races; involving or composed of different races.
Half-Breed: - Offensive. The offspring of parents of different races, A person having parents of different ethnic types.
Eurafrican: Of European and African descent. Relating to or coming from Europe and Africa; a person of mixed European and African descent.
Eurasian: Has been in use since the mid-19th century to refer to a person of mixed European and Asian birth. It was coined during the British rule over India and was long used primarily in designating a person born to a British father and an Indian mother. In a contemporary context Eurasian has a much wider application, denoting only that one parent is Asian and the other whitethat is, either European or of European descent
Half-Caste: Offensive. A person of mixed racial descent. One born of a European parent on the one side, and of a Hindu or Muslim on the other. Also in Austrailia, one born of a White parent and an Aboriginal parent.
Colored: A person of a racial group not regarded as white. A person of mixed racial strains.
Hapa: Native Hawaiians used this word to describe someone who was "half Hawaiian". In colonial times, it was often combined with the word "haole" which meant stranger, foreigner, or white person. As time passed, "hapa" was used on the Continental United States by Japanese Americans and other Asian to describe a person of partial Asian ancestry. Many Nisei - second generation Japanese Americans) considered the term to be derogatory. Today, "Hapa" is simply accepted as a way to describe a person of partial Asian ancestry.
Mestizo: A person of mixed racial ancestry, especially of mixed European and Native American ancestry. n., pl. mes·ti·zos or mes·ti·zoes. ETYMOLOGY: Spanish, mixed, mestizo, from Old Spanish, mixed, from Late Latin mixticius, from Latin mixtus past participle of miscere, to mix.
Zambo: The child of a Mulatto and a Black person; also, the child of an Indian and a Black Person. Also Sambo.

Griffe: A person of mixed negro and American Indian blood. The offspring of a mulatto woman and a negro; also, a mulatto.
Mestee:
Mustee:
Metisse: 1. The offspring of a white person and an American Indian.
2. The offspring of a white person and a quadroon; an octoroon (so called in the West Indies).
http://www.mixedfolks.com/names.htm

[December]

This isn't so much about Obama himself, though I'm using him as an example. He's half black, yet everything I see on him refers to him as "black". The problem is he's half white to, yet I see no one referring to him as "white". The same thing happens with Tiger Woods, though he has a few more things thrown in.

There are plenty of people in America who hate whites so they ignore the fact that he is HALF WHITE.
I'd say Obama's white genes made him start.

[nevadamedic]

This isn't so much about Obama himself, though I'm using him as an example. He's half black, yet everything I see on him refers to him as "black". The problem is he's half white to, yet I see no one referring to him as "white". The same thing happens with Tiger Woods, though he has a few more things thrown in.

Now yes, you could argue that "well, they look black!", but that doesn't really explain it. After all Mariah Carey is black enough to be invited to perform at BET events.

So why don't we refer to these people as "half white"? Or simply "white" instead of "black"? It seems that there are still remnants of the old "one drop" rule in society.

Sure we could just refer to them as people, but I don't want to be overly optimistic.


So what if he's an Oreo? He is a dispicable human being and a poor excuse of a candidate. Who cares what color he is on the outside, he is yellow on the inside.

[4Reaganomics]

and a muslim at heart

[Elrathin]

and a muslim at heart


Proof? Attending a school in Indonesia for 4 years from 6 years of age to 10, does not make someone a Muslim at heart.

[nevadamedic]

and a muslim at heart


:clapper::clapper::clapper::clapper::clapper::clap per:[hr]

and a muslim at heart


Proof? Attending a school in Indonesia for 4 years from 6 years of age to 10, does not make someone a Muslim at heart.


Actually it was until he was 13 or 14. Yes he is, just look at the recent picture of him wearing the Muslim diaper on his head.

[4Reaganomics]

No, but being supported by the entire muslim world, having a radical muslim father and a radical muslim step father, being supported by Farrakhan, having ties to terrorists, being tied to a myriad of muslim names, being surrounded by wahabism as a child, and attending a church that supports and gives awards to a muslim bigot like Farrakhan might have something to do with it.

[Elrathin]

Actually it was until he was 13 or 14. Yes he is, just look at the recent picture of him wearing the Muslim diaper on his head.


Actually it was 10, and he wore garments of that culture just like Bush and any other political person does at times.

This lie of course is not surprising coming from someone that thinks the Clintons had a hit list :lmao::lmao:

[December]

Barack Obama is a White man! :D

[Elrathin]

No, but being supported by the entire muslim world, having a radical muslim father and a radical muslim step father, being supported by Farrakhan, having ties to terrorists, being tied to a myriad of muslim names, being surrounded by wahabism as a child, and attending a church that supports and gives awards to a muslim bigot like Farrakhan might have something to do with it.


Only to those that wish to spread lies. He is a Christian and this has been proven over and over again. But hey if you want to spread false comments, that says more about conservatives then OBama.

[4Reaganomics]

What type of christian church supports only blacks and supports a bigot

I know christianity and trust me, that is not christianity

I can call myself whatever I want, that doesn't mean I fit the behavior of that particular title

[December]

Obama is actually a Mulatto:

Mulatto is a Spanish / Portuguese term that was formerly used in the Spanish and Portuguese Empire to identify Latin American individuals of mixed European and African ancestry. The word originated from the Romance and Latin language. It can also be used as an adjective to describe something as a light brown color.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mulatto

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/photo/2007/07/31/PH2007073101347.jpg[hr]Barack Obama is a Collectivist and Collectivist is very close to a Communist actually.

I think Obama's mixed race is a driving force behind his Collectivist/Communist views.

Remember, the number one goal of the Soviet Communists was a creation of a New Man. The Soviet Communists wanted to mix ALL races and nations into one to create new tribe of people with no heritage or culture of its own. It makes it easier to rule that type of people.

[PatrickHenry]

"that type of people?"

His race is the driving force behind his views?

That's pure drivel, December.

Race doesn't create views one way or another.

[nevadamedic]

and a muslim at heart


Proof? Attending a school in Indonesia for 4 years from 6 years of age to 10, does not make someone a Muslim at heart.


I created a thread called The Real Barack Obama with a story with research by credible journalists, but here is more...............

http://www.newsmax.com/insider_repor.../13/64043.html

http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/I.../25/75322.html

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=57363

http://illinoisreview.typepad.com/ob...muslim_co.html

I've got a shitload more.[hr]
Barack Obama is a White man! :D


All the Black people who are voting for him just because he is Black are going to be pissed off. Now if that isn't racist then I don't know what is.

[Osborn F. Enready]

I think we should just consider him what he is....

A traitorous, liar, who is running on the concept of absolving personal responsibility, and creating a new nanny state to replace it. Same as Clinton.

[Alonzo]

Wow, this thread is becoming a magnet for racist and anti-muslim bigots. Sorry I contributed.

I get the feeling this is going to turn into a palestinian issue in the future, I won't comment on the issue anymore because, when I do, it seems to feed the bigots.

[Buck Laser]

Now let's talk about me. I am a kind of dirty pinkish tan with warts, moles, and all kinds of other unspeakable stuff all over me. Does that mean [b]I'm[/] white?:ponder:

[Osborn F. Enready]

I hope that wasn't aimed at me Alonzo....

I am no bigot, and certainly have no problem with individuals relgion, unless they let it encroach on the political scene. We tried to stop that with seperation of church and state, but still need to work on it quite a bit. ;)

[Buck Laser]

I think we should just consider him what he is....

A traitorous, liar, who is running on the concept of absolving personal responsibility, and creating a new nanny state to replace it. Same as Clinton.

I am constantly amazed at the facility with which libertarians can toss the word "traitorous" around. I really wish I felt as free to describe my thoughts about the positions of libertarians. Words like schizophrenic, anarchist, foolish, unrealistic, narrow-minded, and even hateful come to mind. Oh, and I forgot arrogance. What is it that makes libertarians so sure that they can decide the loyalty of the majority of Americans?

I'm trying to be rational about this, but my hackles rise very quickly when someone accuses me of being a traitor. Osborn, I think you've got some serious explaining and apologizing to do. If this were the age of duels, I'd sure as hell challenge you to one, Mr. "Principled Observer."

[PatrickHenry]

I am constantly amazed at the facility with which libertarians can toss the word "traitorous" around. I really wish I felt as free to describe my thoughts about the positions of libertarians. Words like schizophrenic, anarchist, foolish, unrealistic, narrow-minded, and even hateful come to mind. Oh, and I forgot arrogance. What is it that makes libertarians so sure that they can decide the loyalty of the majority of Americans?...

My, my, Buck. Something about this reminds me of preserva's rants about "libs."

Don't you think it is more fair to take issue with the individual post or member than a whole group?

A group that you mischaracterize?

[Buck Laser]

I am constantly amazed at the facility with which libertarians can toss the word "traitorous" around. I really wish I felt as free to describe my thoughts about the positions of libertarians. Words like schizophrenic, anarchist, foolish, unrealistic, narrow-minded, and even hateful come to mind. Oh, and I forgot arrogance. What is it that makes libertarians so sure that they can decide the loyalty of the majority of Americans?...

My, my, Buck. Something about this reminds me of preserva's rants about "libs."

Don't you think it is more fair to take issue with the individual post or member than a whole group?

A group that you mischaracterize?

Take a look at the shit Osborn throws out. He's ready to call just about anyone a traitor. So are some other libertarians. As for you, I find myself in agreement more often than not. I don't go with you on the conspiracy stuff, but I don't deny that there are conspiracies.

[PatrickHenry]

Hmm..I was just remarking that we can err by generalizing a prominent member's views to all those we identify with his political positions.

But...in actual fact, we are all individuals with unique views of all kinds of things.

See, Scribbler1 self-identifies as a libertarian, too.. So does firefox and NorthEast Cynic

[Buck Laser]

Hmm..I was just remarking that we can err by generalizing a prominent member's views to all those we identify with his political positions.

But...in actual fact, we are all individuals with unique views of all kinds of things.

See, Scribbler1 self-identifies as a libertarian, too.. So does firefox and NorthEast Cynic

I don't disagree with everything every libertarian says, PH. Even Osborn has some good points, but accusing someone of treason contrary to the evidence right in front of every one of us is inexcusable. That's like some guy's dumbass sig line: "ten out of ten terrorist support Obama." Any sentient human being knows that is a ridiculous and impossible assertion. I still think he should be able to say that--it just proves his own ignorance. But Osborn's assertion that Obama is a traitor is like saying "Buck is a murderer." It's not just a lie, it's a God damned lie.

[PatrickHenry]

I disagree with his assessment of Obama as a traitor too.

I don't think that statement makes libertarians arrogant.

[Alonzo]

I hope that wasn't aimed at me Alonzo....


My comment is directed at anyone making negative comments about a race or a religion. I'm not singling any particular person out.

[Pookie]

Back to the topic, no. We should not even consider color or sex or anything in regard to the candidates. What we need to be considering are their stances on issues and if, in our opinion, one will make a good President.
That is all that needs to be considered. All this other hooey is just a load of poo that has nothing whatsoever to do with the candidate's stand on issues.
Purrs,
Pookie

[Buck Laser]

I disagree with his assessment of Obama as a traitor too.

I don't think that statement makes libertarians arrogant.

OK, OK! It makes HIM arrogant. By the way, I'm a libertarian in many respects. I don't think the gummint has much of a role in regulating personal behavior. I think the war on drugs is unspeakably stupid. I think the fact that we have one in a hundred people in prison should be a cause for shame, not pride.

On the other hand, if people choose to endanger themselves and others by flouting common sense in driving, then we need regulations to protect everyone. That's why we have belts, bags, speed limits, intoxication restrictions, etc. We've had public health requirements in this country for most of its history--quarantines, required vaccinations, examinations, etc. And we've usually recognized people's deeply held convictions: we provide for conscientious objectors, orthodox Jews in the military, and Amish for whom separation from the "English" is a tenet of faith.

[PatrickHenry]

I disagree with his assessment of Obama as a traitor too.

I don't think that statement makes libertarians arrogant.

OK, OK! It makes HIM arrogant. By the way, I'm a libertarian in many respects. I don't think the gummint has much of a role in regulating personal behavior. I think the war on drugs is unspeakably stupid. I think the fact that we have one in a hundred people in prison should be a cause for shame, not pride.

On the other hand, if people choose to endanger themselves and others by flouting common sense in driving, then we need regulations to protect everyone. That's why we have belts, bags, speed limits, intoxication restrictions, etc. We've had public health requirements in this country for most of its history--quarantines, required vaccinations, examinations, etc. And we've usually recognized people's deeply held convictions: we provide for conscientious objectors, orthodox Jews in the military, and Amish for whom separation from the "English" is a tenet of faith.

Now THAT'S what I was lookin' for Buck, ol buddy!

And most mainstream libertarians believe in appropriate roles for government.

We are social creatures, after all.

[preservanation]

Back to the topic, no. We should not even consider color or sex or anything in regard to the candidates. What we need to be considering are their stances on issues and if, in our opinion, one will make a good President.
That is all that needs to be considered. All this other hooey is just a load of poo that has nothing whatsoever to do with the candidate's stand on issues.
Purrs,
Pookie
In a perfect world maybe, but the reality is that Hillary supporters are touting that we should elect her because of her gender, and Obama supporters are doing the same with race.
This is all done by Dems...exactly the opposite of what they suggest what everyone else should do.
I'm shocked.

[Elrathin]

In a perfect world maybe, but the reality is that Hillary supporters are touting that we should elect her because of her gender, and Obama supporters are doing the same with race.
This is all done by Dems...exactly the opposite of what they suggest what everyone else should do.
I'm shocked.


And there are people that think we should elect McCain just because he suffered as a POW. Not because of his issues, not because of what he can do for America, but just because some people thought he suffered and he deserves this because of it.

Sorry Pres, the game you denounce is also being played by the Republicans.

[4Reaganomics]

John McCain's status as a former POW gives people the notion that he will be tough on terror and understands national defense

but I guess gender and race could be manipulated into qualifications like fighting for liberty and honor of the American people

oh wait, nevermind

[Elrathin]

John McCain's status as a former POW gives people the notion that he will be tough on terror and understands national defense

but I guess gender and race could be manipulated into qualifications like fighting for liberty and honor of the American people

oh wait, nevermind


How is a POW going to be tough on terror because he was a POW? I can understand the military part because people believe that a veteran has the knowledge to be commander and chief, but there are people that say he should be president because he suffered as a POW and deserves it.

Sorry, but that is exactly the same as saying someone should be president because they are female or black. Being a POW by that fact alone does not and will not make someone a better president.

I respect John McCain's service, but that doesn't mean he would be a good president because of the fact he was a POW.

[4Reaganomics]

I am not saying he should be because he suffered, nor is his POW status enough alone for anyone to consider voting for him

But I do feel that his experience in the situation gave him an understanding of how dangerous the enemy that we are up against truly is

[Elrathin]

I am not saying he should be because he suffered, nor is his POW status enough alone for anyone to consider voting for him

But some are and that is what I am saying is no different than saying someone is female or black should be president.


But I do feel that his experience in the situation gave him an understanding of how dangerous the enemy that we are up against truly is


His military experience maybe, but you are not going on the POW fact alone which is what I'm saying some are which is the same game some of the Dems are playing.

Preservanation was trying to act as though Republicans do not play that game and sorry, some do.

[preservanation]

The Dems are in the process of destroying their party from within, ripping it apart over issues which they say everybody else fixates on, but not them.
The party of unity, when truth comes out, are anything but...
I'm just going to get out of the way, grab some chips and watch them do to themselves what the GOP has not been trying to accomplish with only limited success for forty years.
Poetic justice if you ask me.

[Elrathin]

The Dems are in the process of destroying their party from within, ripping it apart over issues which they say everybody else fixates on, but not them.



Thus is the process of picking a candidate Pres, you Republicans did the SAME THING.

Or did you forget the smear against McCains with the "Black baby" smear in 2000?

[AnnEsthesia]

Not to mention that last time he ran, McCain was "too scarred" by his being a POW to be considered for president. Now suddenly he is cured.

[4Reaganomics]

Obviously we are doing something correctly picking a nominee

I believe we have won 5 of the last 7 general elections, we didn't ruin our chances with the McCain Bush situation

The democratic party on the other hand may very well do so with obama and hillary

[Elrathin]

Obviously we are doing something correctly picking a nominee

I believe we have won 5 of the last 7 general elections, we didn't ruin our chances with the McCain Bush situation

The democratic party on the other hand may very well do so with obama and hillary


That still doesn't mean you guys don't play dirty politics within your party. Again, I am refuting Preservanations and any other Republicans claim that their party doesn't attack one another with frivolous points.