America's first black president... or not?

[mithrilfox]

Hey guys! I've just had a little pet peeve recently that I thought I'd share for a little conversation. Obama isn't really "the first black president." Read on.

I hear a lot of people around me say "the first black president" or "it's a historic election, it's the first black person elected president" or similar things. I live in Japan, but even here many people are talking about it.

It doesn't matter much if at all to me what race the president is... although I know it affects the election, I don't care if he's purple-skinned... as long as he can lead the country, be a positive influence, and promote good causes, I think he'd be a great president.

HOWEVER... saying Obama is the "first black president" is misleading. He is the child of a black man and a white woman (skin color only, ignoring nationalities). Therefore, Barack Obama is equally white and equally black. He's a 50/50.

Therefore... Barack Obama is "just another white president" is just as truthful as saying "Barack Obama is the first black president."

Why do people act as if being half white and half black automatically makes him black? Personally, I don't see him as a "black president," but a "half black, half white president." And to be honest, doesn't that seem to convey the general sense of what we're trying to accomplish in America? Blur the racial lines that divide? And wouldn't Obama be a fitting president to display that role, being half white and half black? Sure, he doesn't "represent" any Asian, Middle Eastern, Hispanic, or other European races, but no man can do it all.

Why do we do a disservice by labeling him as merely "black?"

[PlaceofDis]

he's said himself that he identifies with his African American roots more than his White roots.


that said, i do agree with you that skin color is pretty ****ed trivial.

[zap2]

While its true(the parent), I think it comes back to people like Obama, who's parents were mixed raced, were not given equal rights pre-civil rights movement(just like blacks who parents with both black)

But yes, who really cares about race?

I was looking for the best man or woman for the job...number one was Kucinich, number two was Obama

[SactoGuy18]

Why don't we just avoid this c***ola and just call him American? :rolleyes: After all, he was born in Hawai'i, where mixed-race marriages are quite common. :)

[mithrilfox]

Why don't we just avoid this c***ola and just call him American? :rolleyes: After all, he was born in Hawai'i, where mixed-race marriages are quite common. :)

That's a valid position, and it was common in the early 90's in the US to see advertisements for being "color blind."

Then people started to think that ignoring race/nationality can lead to "racism" in the form of ignoring valid differences in physique and upbringing, among other things.

Although I don't think we should completely ignore race, it shouldn't be so much at the forefront of the news. As long we proclaim "first black president!!!" it means we're still stuck thinking about it and focusing on it, instead of just accepting it and living with it.

[thejadedmonkey]

Why do we do a disservice by labeling him as merely "black?"

Because we're all racist, and if someone has just a part of "blackness" in them, they're black. :p

[skunk]

Because we're all racist, and if someone has just a part of "blackness" in them, they're black. :pUnless of course it doesn't show...

[SteveMobs]

I couldn't agree more with the OP.

It was his white mom who raised him too, his black dad just bounced.

Anyways, hopefully his presidency will be better than the last one.

[That-Is-Bull]

Because he looks black. If some redneck KKK member sees a black person they aren't going to say "hey, looks like we gots onea dem negros -- oh wait, excuse me sir, you're 100% African American, right?" for the same reason they're not going to care about a white African American. How a person looks is all that matters when it comes to racism, and visually Obama's 0% white.

[Rodimus Prime]

Remember Obama gets to play the race card by claiming to be African American.

The standard white male in this world has the deck stack against him with the laws. many companies will always chose the minority to help with that count.

[CorvusCamenarum]

Remember Obama gets to play the race card by claiming to be African American.

The standard white male in this world has the deck stack against him with the laws. many companies will always chose the minority to help with that count.

A lesson he learned after losing in the 2000 election.

It was his white mom who raised him too, his black dad just bounced.

You have that backwards. His mother was the one who left and filed for divorce.

[njmac]

OK, how about "Obama is the first man with black skin to be president of the US"?

If you see a black guy on the street, do you ask him if he has a white father or mother... just so you really know if he's black? 'cause you know, if he did then he wouldn't really be black, right?

[MacNut]

OK, how about "Obama is the first man with black skin to be president of the US"?

If you see a black guy on the street, do you ask him if he has a white father or mother... just so you really know if he's black? 'cause you know, if he did then he wouldn't really be black, right?Derek Jeter is 50/50 but looks more white. But going by the rules is he considered black?

[.Andy]

The standard white male in this world has the deck stack against him with the laws.
Perhaps in an alternate universe.

[EricNau]

In this society, you are the color you look irregardless of your genetics.


The standard white male in this world has the deck stack against him with the laws.
Let's look at the history of the Presidency, shall we?

43 white men
1 black man
0 Women
0 ethnic minorities
0 LGBT
0 atheist/agnostic

[Iscariot]

Racism doesn't deal in fractions.

It's not like you can get half-lynched.

[mithrilfox]

OK, how about "Obama is the first man with black skin to be president of the US"?

If you see a black guy on the street, do you ask him if he has a white father or mother... just so you really know if he's black? 'cause you know, if he did then he wouldn't really be black, right?

OK, I see your point... but why is he automatically "black" and not white? Why does he "get to" be black by being half, but not "get to" be white by being half?

The term "really be black" is used negatively here, I sense. But in all honesty, if he's 50% white as well, can we really say he's the first "black president" and leave it at that? It's inaccurate at best, and plain wrong at worst.

When you cross two breeds of any animal, it is almost never considered just one of those breeds; it is recognized as a mix. If an Asian woman and a white man have children, they are not automatically "Korean" or "Chinese" or whatever, as some will look perhaps slightly more "white" than Asian.

Think about it. I am a white American man, and my wife is a Korean American woman. She was born in Korea to Korean parents. If we have kids, are they simply "Korean" racially? What happened to me :(. Where did my genes go? Did they disappear?

Think about it. We call Obama "black," what happened to his mother :(? Poor woman gives birth to the guy and she's forgotten and left out of the whole equation.

It's both inappropriate and inaccurate. Like I said, at worst, it's just plain incorrect.

Racism doesn't deal in fractions.

It's not like you can get half-lynched.

Alright, so, because of the extreme actions of some people, we should therefore eliminate 50% of someone's ethnicity in order to cater to these extremely polarized viewpoints?

We all understand that a person, bent on hating a race, will not seek to know the percentage of blood from that race a person has... he will act on the looks alone. We know that. That's not what this is about. This is about the truth. And, to be honest, labeling as merely "black" helps to support the cause of racists by turning a blind eye to anything that might ease the hatred. Might the hatred for other races ease when we realize how mixed many of us are? When we stop the mono-labeling of dual-race citizens?

"Whatever you look like, that's what you are" may be how many people operate, but is it how you will operate just because other people do? Do you want to perpetuate that kind of thinking and behavior merely because it exists?

There are a lot of selfish people who think mainly of themselves and themselves only, but I will try to instill in my children a sense of doing what's best for everyone. I won't let the behavior of the "masses" lower my own standards if I can help it.

In this society, you are the color you look irregardless of your genetics.



Let's look at the history of the Presidency, shall we?

Corrected version below:


43 white-skinned men of various racial backgrounds (German, French, English, Italian, Irish, Portuguese, Polish, etc).
1 half-Kenyan half-white man (I dunno the particular white races his mother is descended from)
0 Women
0 ethnic minorities (only true if you exclude the variety of white races that are generally lumped into one)
0 LGBT
0 atheist/agnostic (at least, 0 publicly proclaimed atheists/agnostics)

Lumping all "white" people into one race? FAIL :(. Lumping all "black" people into one race? FAIL :(. Lumping ALL OTHER races into one general category? FAIL :(.

Thinking that we need to have presidents from every sort of walk of life? Not really FAIL, but not success either. :confused:

[NT1440]

This is about the truth? Heres the truth: His race doesnt matter, if hes black or half black or purple, hes the president.

[Sedulous]

Actually, if you want to really get your nerd on, Obama is slightly more white than black. Inside every eukaryotic cell (humans fall under this category) there are mitochondria. Mitochondria are actually tiny symbiotic cells that have their own DNA/genome. The "human" genome actually does not code for mitochondria. They are needed by eukaryotic cells for the energy that they produce in return for living inside your cells. Where do we get mitochondria if they are not actually part of our genome? They come from mom's egg! The few mitochondria inside the egg divide and multiply inside each of our cells as we grow. So, in Obama's case, he would have inherited slightly more "white" DNA than "black".

This simple fact has been what allows scientists to track how related things are. The same ancestral mitochondrial cells are in all of us.

[Ugg]

OK, I see your point... but why is he automatically "black" and not white? Why does he "get to" be black by being half, but not "get to" be white by being half?

The term "really be black" is used negatively here, I sense. But in all honesty, if he's 50% white as well, can we really say he's the first "black president" and leave it at that? It's inaccurate at best, and plain wrong at worst.

When you cross two breeds of any animal, it is almost never considered just one of those breeds; it is recognized as a mix. If an Asian woman and a white man have children, they are not automatically "Korean" or "Chinese" or whatever, as some will look perhaps slightly more "white" than Asian.

Think about it. I am a white American man, and my wife is a Korean American woman. She was born in Korea to Korean parents. If we have kids, are they simply "Korean" racially? What happened to me :(. Where did my genes go? Did they disappear?

Think about it. We call Obama "black," what happened to his mother :(? Poor woman gives birth to the guy and she's forgotten and left out of the whole equation.

It's both inappropriate and inaccurate. Like I said, at worst, it's just plain incorrect.

I really don't know why you're even bringing this up.

My ethnicity, as known, is as follows:
Half Finnish (Ostrobothnian)
3/8 German (Mecklenburger and Lower Saxon with a soupçon of French Huguenot)
1/8 English (Mix of Cornish and Northumbrian)

Only three great grandparents were born outside of the US.

However, if I wanted to call myself French-Huguenot, I would have that right because it is a part of my heritage, however distant it may be.

If Obama called himself white, he has that right, however he would have been laughed out of town. Not only because obviously he isn't, but because he has had to bear the burden of being black in a country that is unwilling to deal directly with the complex issues of skin color, ethnicity, country(ies) of upbringing, language, etc, etc, etc.

He had a unique upbringing in Hawaii and four years in Indonesia. A couple of years in LA and then Chicago and Boston.

There's simply no possible way to classify him and this same point came up in the "When will Europe elect a black President" thread.

One's ethnicity is what one makes of it, president or no, he gets to decide who he is, not some insecure white guy who can't get over the fact that palefaces are, worldwide, a growing minority.

[Scarlet Fever]

Who cares? Why does it matter?

[branjosef]

Either way he'll probably get a monument and his birthday will probably be a holiday in a few dacades. Had Hillary been elected (despite what you think of her) as the first woman president she would get the same thing. I wonder if he has scouted out the property yet.

[EricNau]

Corrected version below:

43 white-skinned men of various racial backgrounds (German, French, English, Italian, Irish, Portuguese, Polish, etc).
1 half-Kenyan half-white man (I dunno the particular white races his mother is descended from)
0 Women
0 ethnic minorities (only true if you exclude the variety of white races that are generally lumped into one)
0 LGBT
0 atheist/agnostic (at least, 0 publicly proclaimed atheists/agnostics)

Lumping all "white" people into one race? FAIL :(. Lumping all "black" people into one race? FAIL :(. Lumping ALL OTHER races into one general category? FAIL :(.

Thinking that we need to have presidents from every sort of walk of life? Not really FAIL, but not success either. :confused:
You refer to the first 43 Presidents as being "white-skinned" men of various racial backgrounds; similarly, would Obama not be a black-skinned man of various racial backgrounds? Does that not make him black?

Again, race refers to one's visible characteristics, not genetic heritage. You belong to the race in which your appearance associates you.

[Counterfit]

Either way he'll probably get a monument and his birthday will probably be a holiday in a few dacades. Had Hillary been elected (despite what you think of her) as the first woman president she would get the same thing. I wonder if he has scouted out the property yet.

You've got high hopes, huh? ;) :D

[mgguy]

In this society, you are the color you look irregardless of your genetics.



Let's look at the history of the Presidency, shall we?


0 LGBT


Are you sure?

[mgguy]

So, in Obama's case, he would have inherited slightly more "white" DNA than "black".

Whew! I feel better now. :rolleyes::D:p:o:(:cool:

[dmr727]

What are we arguing about? Barack *looks* black, which for the purposes of racism, is all that matters.

[CalBoy]

Remember Obama gets to play the race card by claiming to be African American.

Totally man.

I mean Collins and Snowe weren't really on board with the stimulus bill, but then Barack says,

"Hey baby, I'm black." And the two of them totally say,

"Oooh, we've been race carded."


The standard white male in this world has the deck stack against him with the laws. many companies will always chose the minority to help with that count.

I just hate how white males are losing so many opportunities these days.

I mean they only make $1.25 for every $1 a woman or non-white person makes.

It used to be 3:1. :mad:

Let's look at the history of the Presidency, shall we?

43 white men 42 white men
1 black man
0 Women
0 ethnic minorities
0 LGBT
0 atheist/agnostic

Grover Cleveland was one man but two presidents. ;)

More to the point: Obama is genetically mixed, but more phenotypically black, so that's what people associate with him. His achievement is still important for those of us who aren't straight white males from the established elite, so let us have this one.

[dmr727]

The standard white male in this world has the deck stack against him with the laws.

Chris Rock said it best. "There's not a white man in this room that would trade places with me - and I'm RICH!"

[pooky]

Had Hillary been elected (despite what you think of her) as the first woman president...

Are you sure? After all, one only one of Hillary's parents was a woman, the other was a man. That makes her only half woman, by my count.

[mgguy]

Are you sure? After all, one only one of Hillary's parents was a woman, the other was a man. That makes her only half woman, by my count.

Beautiful line.

[mactastic]

Are you sure?
Is that a top hat, Mr. Lincoln, or are you just happy to see me? :p

[EricNau]

Grover Cleveland was one man but two presidents. ;)
Excellent catch. :)

[CalBoy]

Excellent catch. :)

Guess I just proved my dorkiness didn't I? :p

[EricNau]

Guess I just proved my dorkiness didn't I? :p
Indeed, but it's an admirable trait!

:D

[CalBoy]

Indeed, but it's an admirable trait!

:D

Couldn't be; the only reason I know that is that I'm a political science major! :eek:

[EricNau]

Couldn't be; the only reason I know that is that I'm a political science major! :eek:
PolySci? Oh, then, errrr, nevermind. :o

:p

[CalBoy]

PolySci? Oh, then, errrr, nevermind. :o

:p

It gets worse; just wait until I head off to law school. :p:o:(

[mithrilfox]

One's ethnicity is what one makes of it, president or no, he gets to decide who he is, not some insecure white guy who can't get over the fact that palefaces are, worldwide, a growing minority.

Do you always feel the need to insult and attack random strangers?

I've placed you on my ignore list. People who attack and assume the worst of others without any knowledge are unworthy of my attention.

[mithrilfox]

Who cares? Why does it matter?

If it really doesn't matter, why are the newspapers proclaiming it throughout the world?

It shouldn't really matter... newspapers should not be falsely representing him merely "black."

And to the one who said that you are whatever race you physically resemble, no, that's just not true beyond some social circles. You cannot be "Asian" because you are a Hispanic man who merely looks Asian. Getting a scholarship for being Asian just for looking it is grounds for losing that money, if they discover you are not Asian.

[.Andy]

Do you always feel the need to insult and attack random strangers?

I've placed you on my ignore list. People who attack and assume the worst of others without any knowledge are unworthy of my attention.
Please don't announce who you are putting on you ignore list. None of us care. It's for PM between yourself and Ugg if you feel the need to let him know.

If it really doesn't matter, why are the newspapers proclaiming it throughout the world?

It shouldn't really matter... newspapers should not be falsely representing him merely "black."
Send some emails to some newspapers and let them know your thoughts. They all have letters to the editor sections.

And to the one who said that you are whatever race you physically resemble, no, that's just not true beyond some social circles. You cannot be "Asian" because you are a Hispanic man who merely looks Asian. Getting a scholarship for being Asian just for looking it is grounds for losing that money, if they discover you are not Asian.
You're missing the point here. The point is that in general society only cares about outward appearance. Most people don't split hairs and don't care to argue such finer details. If one looks african american that's what they'll be treated as such irrespective of their genealogy. Race is largely a societal construct.

Conversely if you apply for a university scholarship on grounds of ethnicity, it is indeed ethnicity that is being tested. They'll want you to submit documents proving your ancestry. They don't award them on outward appearance.

[mithrilfox]

Please don't announce who you are putting on you ignore list. None of us care. It's for PM between yourself and Ugg if you feel the need to let him know.

I have a policy on all internet forums: I don't allow regular posters to moderate my posts. If you don't like it, put me on ignore :).


Send some emails to some newspapers and let them know your thoughts. They all have letters to the editor sections.

If your opinion is "we don't care, don't post..." Then the *real* question is why are you reading and responding? It's absolutely ironic that people post saying "I don't care, I don't want to talk about it."


You're missing the point here. The point is that in general society only cares about outward appearance. Most people don't split hairs and don't care to argue such finer details. If one looks african american that's what they'll be treated as such irrespective of their genealogy. Race is largely a societal construct.

Well that's the question here. Is Obama really "black," or is it accurate to simply say "black" referring to him? I believe the answer is no. That's fine if you disagree, but people needn't be rude or unnecessarily harsh. I will inform them of being placed on my ignore list however I choose, and no one but a moderator will control that. You were on my ignore list when I first came back, but I removed everyone for a fresh start. I'm a little trigger-happy with the ignore feature because I've learned it's pointless to converse with people who build preconceived constructs of who they think you are, and then try to force you into those constructs against your will.. Talking to such people is banging your head against a wall.

[.Andy]

Well that's the question here. Is Obama really "black," or is it accurate to simply say "black" referring to him? I believe the answer is no.
I think you'll find that if your definition of "black" or "white" is 100% gene purity you're going to find that not many people qualify as either camp. It really comes down to how you define race.

[skunk]

"Black" refers to skin colour. The alternative in this polar scheme is "white". One is "slave", the other is "master". Obama is "black". Any fool can see that. This is a momentous upset to the established order and mindset. This is why it bears repeating.

Denial ain't just a river in Africa.

[mithrilfox]

I think you'll find that if your definition of "black" or "white" is 100% gene purity you're going to find that not many people qualify as either camp. It really comes down to how you define race.

Exactly.

So what's the issue here?

I'm particularly concerned, not afraid or paranoid, but concerned that people are genuinely dismissing "white" as a valid race for any who don't look pure.

That's the thing... why is a half-black person "black," half-asian person "Asian," and a half-middle eastern person "middle eastern," but never "white?"

It's a screwed up system where we, as a culture, somehow consider "white" some baseline, less important, uninteresting race. We celebrate Obama's "blackness" but virtually ignoring his "whiteness." What is the reasoning behind this? "White people have had advantages in the past and still do, so let's start ignoring them to even it out" ?

We're raising a whole culture of young people to believe that white is "boring, basic, baseline, normal," and that everything else is "ethnic, unique, special, different." This isn't doing anyone a real service, IMO. If you consider food "ethnic" when it's not from a predominantly "white" country, you are making "whiteness" the baseline by which to judge other races. Is that really a good thing?

People think race is primarily social, and therefore society defines it. Society believes what it teaches itself, so why do we teach ourselves these things? Why can't "white" be just another definition or general scope of races that we recognize equally with anything else?

Honestly, it doesn't matter much to me if white people get "bred" out of existence. And that's part of the problem. Ask a Japanese person what they think if Japanese people dissolve into another race. Or Mexican people, or some American black people. I can bet you that they all can tell you why they feel it would be a disservice to let their own "kind" just dissolve into nothing, they could talk about their uniqueness or what they offer to the world culturally.

Ask any white person and they are likely to say, "duh... I dunno." We're teaching white people not to feel unique, or special, or valuable, or even as a "race." It's just sort of a "baseline." No race should be able to qualify every other race, and neither should any race be relegated to obscurity.

P.S. To prevent the stereotypical "you're racist!!! <whine> <moan>" stuff, here's my disclaimer: Yes I'm white, I'm married to a Korean woman and live in Japan and have Japanese friends and I know Japanese and Spanish and blah blah blah .... ...

[.Andy]

Exactly.

So what's the issue here?
The issue appears to be that you define race purely by genealogy. Society by large doesn't use the same measure.

[skunk]

That's the thing... why is a half-black person "black," half-asian person "Asian," and a half-middle eastern person "middle eastern," but never "white?"Simply because "white" is synonymous (to white people) with "one of us". Anything other is suspect.

[mactastic]

Ask any white person and they are likely to say, "duh... I dunno."
Any white person, eh? How about we ask Matthew Hale, Tom Metzger, or the folks at Stormfront if they care one way or the other if the white race is bred from existence?

That's a fancy straw man you've constructed there, but it doesn't pass even a cursory inspection as a real argument. I assure you, I have met many white people who think the fact that the "mud races" are "polluting" the white gene pool is a tragedy of epic proportion. Many of them are even willing to commit violence to prevent it from occurring.

I would also point out that the tradition of calling people with any degree of African ancestry "black" in this country was started by white folks who used it as a means to enforce their version of racial purity. I would point you to the terms "quadroon" or "octaroon". Throughout the history of this country, whites have defined anyone with even a hint of African ancestry as black, so it should hardly be surprising to you that blacks have absorbed that into their identity. (Although it is my understanding that racially-mixed people often run into acceptance issues with both side of their heritage -- it's not just a whites-only deal.)

And, of course, it matters little what you think about Obama's racial makeup. He is legally entitled to call himself black on all government forms. This is just one more way for people who disagree with Obama politically to attempt to de-legitimize him.

As for your comment about mixing different species of animals being similar to mixing races -- that can charitably be described as treading real close to outright racism. It's an easy argument to make from behind your computer screen, but I somehow doubt you'd be willing to make that argument on a street corner in Harlem...

Edit:
Oh, and as for Obama calling himself black? That is his decision to make however he chooses. That is the reality, no matter how much you dislike it. Do you love freedom so much to tolerate what you can't understand? Or will you tyrannize others with you own point of view?

This is where men (oddly enough, only men for some reason) find out if they really stand for freedom or not. Do you?

[Iscariot]

Alright, so, because of the extreme actions of some people, we should therefore eliminate 50% of someone's ethnicity in order to cater to these extremely polarized viewpoints?

Ask any white person and they are likely to say, "duh... I dunno."

You must be living in some kind of wonderful utopia if you think this is in response to some kind of racial extremism. Racism is still very much rampant in virtually every corner of the globe, made no less obvious by just how momentous an occasion a half-black president is. Race isn't just about the genetic makeup of your ethnicity, it's also about how you've lived, what you've experienced and who you identify with. Anyone who has lived as a racial minority and experienced the lifelong struggle against racism is going to identify far more with that minority and far less with the majority.

[EricNau]

This is just one more way for people who disagree with Obama politically to attempt to de-legitimize him.
That, or to further their own white supremacist views. After all, a "pure" african american couldn't possibly be accomplished enough to be President, could he? :rolleyes:

[njmac]

Derek Jeter is 50/50 but looks more white. But going by the rules is he considered black?

I didn't know Jeter was half black. I thought he was white. I think it wouldn't be so important if we nominated a white looking guy who has a black mom/dad. The fact that we elected a man with black skin, has a black wife and black colored children to the white house. That is quite a leap for this country.

OK, I see your point... but why is he automatically "black" and not white? Why does he "get to" be black by being half, but not "get to" be white by being half?

The term "really be black" is used negatively here, I sense. But in all honesty, if he's 50% white as well, can we really say he's the first "black president" and leave it at that? It's inaccurate at best, and plain wrong at worst.

When you cross two breeds of any animal, it is almost never considered just one of those breeds; it is recognized as a mix. If an Asian woman and a white man have children, they are not automatically "Korean" or "Chinese" or whatever, as some will look perhaps slightly more "white" than Asian.

Think about it. I am a white American man, and my wife is a Korean American woman. She was born in Korea to Korean parents. If we have kids, are they simply "Korean" racially? What happened to me :(. Where did my genes go? Did they disappear?

Think about it. We call Obama "black," what happened to his mother :(? Poor woman gives birth to the guy and she's forgotten and left out of the whole equation.

It's both inappropriate and inaccurate. Like I said, at worst, it's just plain incorrect.

Obama is biracial. He identifies as black. He has black skin. He is not denying his mother by saying he is black. He is, after all, black. He is not denying his mixed race but identifying with the way he looks.

IF he was white skinned and he was going around telling people he was black, I think that would be WEIRD because his skin is white. He would be the first President in the US with a black father, but not the first black president because we are talking about skin color... not race/ethnicity/heritage or whatever.

[SmartIndianKid]

That's the thing... why is a half-black person "black," half-asian person "Asian," and a half-middle eastern person "middle eastern," but never "white?"


In America, that is true.

If you were in Africa, and the majority would see the non-native (ie. "white") features, and identify the half-black person as black.

In Asia, a half asian would be identified as white. In the middle east, a half-middle eastern person would be considered white.

Obama is considered the first "black" president because of three points

1. We have never had a president who was black, so that is the "first" part of the statement
2. Barack Obama is black. When you look at him, he is. So therefore, he is black.
3. He is the President

That is what makes him the "First Black President"

[és:]

1. We have never had a president who was black, so that is the "first" part of the statement
2. Barack Obama is black. When you look at him, he is. So therefore, he is black.
3. He is the President

That is what makes him the "First Black President"

:D

I think this whole 'argument' is as absurd as it is pointless.

[branjosef]

Are you sure? After all, one only one of Hillary's parents was a woman, the other was a man. That makes her only half woman, by my count.

HA! I'm sure Bill would bring plenty of ladies to make up for the other half if necessary. When I thought about it, I was reminded of the futurama episode where they built the bill clinton monument and it was 20x bigger than the washington monument. Ah..the Clintons, soon chelsea will run for president. Its just a matter of time. :D

[Cave Man]

HOWEVER... saying Obama is the "first black president" is misleading. He is the child of a black man and a white woman (skin color only, ignoring nationalities). Therefore, Barack Obama is equally white and equally black. He's a 50/50.

Genetically-speaking, this is completely meaningless. We're all Africans if we go back far enough. (Well, except for the fundamentalist weirdos, who were dropped off on the planet 6000 years ago because they couldn't fit in on their home planets. ;) )

[skunk]

Genetically-speaking, this is completely meaningless.Completely half-witted, I'm tempted to say. But I won't, because it would be rude.

[djellison]

It doesn't matter much if at all to me what race the president is...

If that were really true - this thread wouldn't exist.

[iJohnHenry]

I think this whole 'argument' is as absurd as it is pointless.

He may lean towards his father's race, but if this were about Jew/Gentile, if his mother was a Jew he would be a Jew.

I am sad to see he actually professes his "preference". He does his Mother a disservice by doing this, IMO.

Completely half-witted, I'm tempted to say. But I won't, because it would be rude.

Easy sport, we wouldn't want you to burst a blood vessel or anything. :p

[Rt&Dzine]

Why do we do a disservice by labeling him as merely "black?"

Every half "black" person I know considers him/herself black. Mostly because of what they've had to deal with in their lives.

You also have to put this in the context of the era Obama grew up in. Things were different during the 1960s. It's a lot different now and hard to understand.

[SmartIndianKid]

:D

I think this whole 'argument' is as absurd as it is pointless.

The back of your head is ridiculous

[mithrilfox]

Edit:
Oh, and as for Obama calling himself black? That is his decision to make however he chooses. That is the reality, no matter how much you dislike it. Do you love freedom so much to tolerate what you can't understand? Or will you tyrannize others with you own point of view?

This is where men (oddly enough, only men for some reason) find out if they really stand for freedom or not. Do you?

I do, and that's why he can call himself black, and I can call him white, and I'm equally valid in that opinion.

Instead, I call him a half-black half-white. That way, we do not completely discredit his mother by removing her from the picture with this "I'm black" nonsense.

If that were really true - this thread wouldn't exist.

False. It just means you haven't fully read the thread. The issue is about the claim, not the president himself.

But then, some people can never get beyond their own preconceived notions, and arguing with them is like banging your head against a wall.

I will not try to convince you again. The reality is there, you will either choose your own delusions for your own purposes, or reality. It's your choice.

[EricNau]

I do, and that's why he can call himself black, and I can call him white, and I'm equally valid in that opinion.
If you weren't privy to Obama's family heritage, what color would you say he is?

[Rt&Dzine]

I do, and that's why he can call himself black, and I can call him white, and I'm equally valid in that opinion.

Instead, I call him a half-black half-white. That way, we do not completely discredit his mother by removing her from the picture with this "I'm black" nonsense.

You're just trying to be disrespectful. I doubt that you give a ***** about his mother.

[Counterfit]

black colored children
For some reason, that makes me want to think that their skin tone is due to Sharpie, rather than melanin... :confused:


Someone posted in one of the early post-election threads that they don't consider Obama "African-American" because he didn't grow up with the stereotypical southern-black childhood. No "soul food", no stories about slavery and Jim Crow laws, etc. etc.
But that doesn't matter. Born in Hawai'i -> American citizen + African father = African-American.

[mithrilfox]

You're just trying to be disrespectful. I doubt that you give a ***** about his mother.

I don't particularly know her and can't say either way if I care or not ...

But I can say that I care that people disregard one of their parents when mentioning their race, thereby completely disregarding that person's heritage and race.

Now *that* is disrespectful.

P.S. I don't think you meant the word "disrespectful." Find a better word to say what you really mean.

[NT1440]

Is this thread essentially about whitey not getting his shout out?:confused:

[zap2]

I am sad to see he actually professes his "preference". He does his Mother a disservice by doing this, IMO.



I don't see it that way, thats how people have viewed him for his whole life(since he's physically "black")...he had to deal with racism because of it

People group him in group because of what they see

[Lord Blackadder]

Why do people act as if being half white and half black automatically makes him black?

Because that is precisely the way Europeans have defined "white" and "black" ever since Europeans first encountered Africans. It's mostly an artifact of the slavery. There was a clear hierarchy of power and differential purity of race as defined by Europeans, with white being at the top, mixed race being in the middle and black near the bottom (except for Native Americans, but that's another tragedy entirely). Since the stakes were so high, it was very important to be able to define what it meant to be "white" (people who cannot be enslaved) versus "black" (people who generally can be enslaved).

Within the European colonial slave system, your chances in life hinged on how "white" you were. Persons of mixed race who showed traits closer to an African in appearance faced more prejudice than people who looked "more white". But any discernible African traits automatically made you more "black" than "white". South and Central America was particularly rigid in that regard - there were (and still are) scores of grades of "whiteness", each with it's own word and each fit into one niche of the racial hierarchy. It was almost like a simplified caste system.

So no, while I agree that race ideally should not be this big of an issue, the past is continually haunting us in this matter. On the one hand, many people feel that Obama's race makes the election a historic moment in the quest for true equality and the stamping out of racism in America (though it is still far from an end to that quest). On the other hand, racist fringe groups retreat into ever darker recesses of their frightening and violent ideology because this increased equality is seen as some sort of threat.

There is no way to be colorblind in this matter - any attempt to do so would be a willful ignorance or rejection of the status quo. - which isn't to say we must accept the status quo. But if you refuse to see reality you'll never be able to change it for the better.

As long as we see people as "white" and "black", society will define ways of placing people into those categories. Obama fits mainstream America's definition of "black", for better or worse.

Fifty years ago our current president would have to sit at the back of buses, use "colored" water fountains and would not be served at many restaurants. THAT is why he is black. To ignore his race is to ignore the past wrongs we are still trying to right even today.

[mithrilfox]

Is this thread essentially about whitey not getting his shout out?:confused:

No.

[mithrilfox]

Fifty years ago our current president would have to sit at the back of buses, use "colored" water fountains and would not be served at many restaurants. THAT is why he is black. To ignore his race is to ignore the past wrongs we are still trying to right even today.

You had a lot of good points and almost all are valid...

And, for the record, I didn't know about Obama's white mother until I looked it up for myself. Why did I look it up? He didn't look like the average black American... I knew something was different. I thought maybe he had some Middle Eastern blood in him or something. I just thought he wasn't the child of two black parents.

I don't think anyone wins or loses because of what color the president is. In fact, Obama being labeled as "black" means he is even less able to promote and encourage legislation helping anyone who is black because any attempt he makes will be highly criticized as the president "watching over his own" instead of what's best for the country. Right or wrong, he'll have to keep distant from anything of that sort to avoid the heavy criticism.

If Obama is "black," then he is also "white." We can live in a messed-up world where looks is the only thing that matters, or we can also account for fact, truth, reality.

To some of the other posters, I seem to understand your position as, "Duh, everyone else is stupid... let's all be stupid!"

[Rt&Dzine]

P.S. I don't think you meant the word "disrespectful." Find a better word to say what you really mean.

Well ... you caught me ;) but I'll stick with disrespectful.

It's obvious you don't like the guy. That's fine. But trying to deny someone their racial identity is sleazy. And black is his racial identity whether you agree with it or not.

Is this thread essentially about whitey not getting his shout out?:confused:

LOL

[mithrilfox]

Well ... you caught me ;) but I'll stick with disrespectful.

It's obvious you don't like the guy. That's fine. But trying to deny someone their racial identity is sleazy. And black is his racial identity whether you agree with it or not.


I don't have an opinion of President Obama yet.

But let me tell you somethings I won't do no matter what:

1. Pretend he isn't *my* president... he is

2. Pretend he cheated to win... he won the election, PERIOD.

3. Make fun of every misspeak he makes

4. Jump on the bash-Obama bandwagon if it ever gets moving

5. Pretend that the next president after Obama is the savior of Americans

I'll evaluate President Obama based on his actions *IN* the office, not his promises before the office. I vote based on what I believe a president will do, and then I evaluate based on what they actually do.

Please don't assume that I don't like Obama just because I mention his 50% white heritage.

[leekohler]

I evaluate based on what they actually do.


Funny- that's exactly how we evaluated Bush.

[brad.c]

I don't have an opinion of President Obama yet.

Really? You certainly have an opinion ABOUT him.

Obama was born at a time when a man with his colour of skin would have had a hard time casting a vote. Now he has won the vote. THAT is historically significant.

Use your time-out wisely, my friend.

[és:]

The back of your head is ridiculous

I think this is a fair, if slightly obscure, assessment of the reverse of my cranium.

[mactastic]

I do, and that's why he can call himself black, and I can call him white, and I'm equally valid in that opinion.

Instead, I call him a half-black half-white. That way, we do not completely discredit his mother by removing her from the picture with this "I'm black" nonsense.
He said, ignoring the entire thrust of my post.

Talking to some people IS indeed like banging ones head against a brick wall. :p

[Rt&Dzine]

Please don't assume that I don't like Obama just because I mention his 50% white heritage.

Fair enough if all you are doing is mentioning his white heritage. But that's not what you're doing.

[oscillatewildly]

Obama is mixed race, historical classification does not negate this fact.

Has there been a 'Native American' President?

[mithrilfox]

Fair enough if all you are doing is mentioning his white heritage. But that's not what you're doing.

Yea it is ;). I'm mentioning his white heritage and that excluding it based on what appears to be a dominant skin tone is merely ignorance of reality.

From Mactastic:
He said, ignoring the entire thrust of my post.

Talking to some people IS indeed like banging ones head against a brick wall.

I read your whole post. I still hold the opinion that I do. Believe it or not, a person not agreeing with your opinion != (does not equal) ignoring what you say.

But you already know that. By saying that I ignored it, it allows you to portray me as overly opinionated or unwilling to listen, or stubborn, or whatever. It's a common tactic. :rolleyes:

P.S. I'm back after a highly encouraged 3-day holiday. Did ya miss me?

[skunk]

It doesn't matter much if at all to me what race the president is... although I know it affects the election, I don't care if he's purple-skinned...It's funny how often people to whom skin colour is clearly an issue come up with this line. It's always purple, too.

HOWEVER... saying Obama is the "first black president" is misleading. He is the child of a black man and a white woman (skin color only, ignoring nationalities). Therefore, Barack Obama is equally white and equally black. He's a 50/50.

Therefore... Barack Obama is "just another white president" is just as truthful as saying "Barack Obama is the first black president."Since he is quite obviously not "white", saying he is "just another white president" would be totally asinine. Are you blind?

Why do we do a disservice by labeling him as merely "black?"Not "merely" black but "astoundingly" black. You do a disservice to the force of change by denying it.

[mithrilfox]

It's funny how often people to whom skin colour is clearly an issue come up with this line. It's always purple, too.

Since he is quite obviously not "white", saying he is "just another white president" would be totally asinine. Are you blind?


I said that "just another white president" is equally true as "the first black president."

I didn't say either one is true. In fact both are false, IMO. Others disagree, they've stated why, and some of then even felt the need to accuse me of not listening to them because I didn't change my opinion for them.

Skunk you seem pretty smart... for real... I'm not patronizing. How come you didn't see what I said? Try reading it again, you should see it this time for sure:

Therefore... Barack Obama is "just another white president" is just as truthful as saying "Barack Obama is the first black president."

Both statements are false, IMO. But if one is true, then the other therefore must also be true, IMO.

[skunk]

To those who can see, Barack Obama is undeniably "black".

[mithrilfox]

To those who can see, Barack Obama is undeniably "black".

Just an opinion. The issue relies on the definition of "black." Your opinion of the definition allows you to be so "matter of fact, it's reality, in your face."

That is, however, merely your opinion. Others may or may not share it. I do not. My children will not be merely nor entirely "Asian" or "Korean" just because my wife is Korean. They will be half white, half Korean.

There are, unfortunately, people in the world who can function on nothing more than what meets their eye. I guess they never watched Transformers as a kid :(

[skunk]

Just an opinion. The issue relies on the definition of "black." "Black" is a visual reference, nothing more. It is certainly not a reliable indication of racial origin. However, it is by reference to this visual cue that "black" people have been historically disadvantaged, disenfranchised and disempowered.

[WinterMute]

In the context of North American political and social definitions Obama is black.

That the white portion of America has chose to define mixed race people with one parent of African or afro-caribean descent as "black" is not his fault. This does not occur with other mixed race people, many of whom claim their descendancy dependant on public holidays (Irish-Italians for instance).

To call Obama white for any reason is to miss a fundamental structure of American society.

[brad.c]

Just an opinion. The issue relies on the definition of "black." Your opinion of the definition allows you to be so "matter of fact, it's reality, in your face."(

Instead of splitting hairs on how "black" you think he is, why not just accept that he is the first visibly non-white president. That is the significant factor. If he was purple, who cares if his upbringing was more blue than red? It's a colour change in an old-boys network. Up to this point, the biggest breakthrough had been Kennedy's Catholicism.

BTW: What's the point in bragging about your Time-outs in your sig? You don't get the chance to brag about a banning.

[Cave Man]

That is, however, merely your opinion. Others may or may not share it. I do not. My children will not be merely nor entirely "Asian" or "Korean" just because my wife is Korean. They will be half white, half Korean.

HOWEVER... saying Obama is the "first black president" is misleading. He is the child of a black man and a white woman (skin color only, ignoring nationalities). Therefore, Barack Obama is equally white and equally black. He's a 50/50.

These statements are simply artificial labels. Until you can calculate the penetrance of his maternal and paternal melanin alleles, then do the same for the other dozen (and likely more) genes that are known to control skin tone, then you can say unequivocally that he's "50% white" and/or "50% black" if the data support it (which is statistically unlikely). The reality of it is, there's no such thing as black or white in biology.

Until people can get off their intellectual asses and understand this, racism will be a prevalent phenomenon in human societies.

[Lord Blackadder]

"Black" is a visual reference, nothing more. It is certainly not a reliable indication of racial origin. However, it is by reference to this visual cue that "black" people have been historically disadvantaged, disenfranchised and disempowered.

This was the thrust of my long-winded post earlier.

mithrilfox, it may be laudable to try and see past race, but by simply refusing to admit that Obama is "black" by the standards of our culture you're choosing to ignore reality.

People with dark skin are black, or alternately African American to use the PC expression. This is the de facto truth. The best way to move forward in the quest for true racial equality is not to deny reality but to work to improve or change it.

EDIT: I see our OP has gotten himself banned. I suppose I shouldn't expect a response to this post then. :rolleyes:

[Dont Hurt Me]

The shade and color of ones skin should be 100% irrelevant. Im offended at this thread. Im not White and you aint Black. Ive never met a White person and I never met a Black person. Thats the truth.

[Lord Blackadder]

The shade and color of ones skin should be 100% irrelevant. Im offended at this thread. Im not White and you aint Black. Ive never met a White person and I never met a Black person. Thats the truth.

Sadly, I've seen far too much race prejudice in this world to agree with you.

The shade and color of one's skin is 100% relevant. This is because your skin color reflects your ethnic background, and your ethnic background has a major effect on the way perceive your world, and the way the world perceives you. Refusing to see those differences is silly. How we see those differences is the important part.

If you are black, chances you are much more aware of racism, you have blood relatives who know prejudice firsthand. Everyone has some notion of "where they come from", and that story is different for every ethnic group as well as every member of that group. In the US it can be especially complex. We should not use these differences to persecute people - nor should we try to pretend that differences (whether large or small) don't exist. Rather, we should celebrate our variety.

Obama is, first and foremost, an American. He is also "black" by the standards of mainstream society. In reality he's much more a citizen of the world. There is a certain tyranny in calling someone "black" or "white", and Obama's background demonstrates that in spades. But it cannot change his appearance, and on that level at least the terms "black" and "white" are unlikely to ever go away.

[skunk]

There is a certain tyranny in calling someone "black" or "white", and Obama's background demonstrates that in spades.Nice. ;)

[iJohnHenry]

Oh dear, not this again??

http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g158/MouseMeat/stlastbattle-1.jpghttp://timfasano.typepad.com/my_weblog/images/stlastbattle.jpg

[jonbravo77]

Oh dear, not this again??

http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g158/MouseMeat/stlastbattle-1.jpghttp://timfasano.typepad.com/my_weblog/images/stlastbattle.jpg

That is a really good and powerful episode for it's time...

[iJohnHenry]

Yep, Gene was spot-on when he wrote that one. :D

[apsterling]

In this society, you are the color you look irregardless of your genetics.



Let's look at the history of the Presidency, shall we?

43 white men
1 black man
0 Women
0 ethnic minorities
0 LGBT
0 atheist/agnostic

If I recall correctly Ben Franklin was an atheist

[iJohnHenry]

And don't forget to add FDR as a new category.

[SmartIndianKid]

If I recall correctly Ben Franklin was an atheist

But what bearing does that have on a list of presidents?

[iJohnHenry]

"In God we trust" sound familiar??

[Dont Hurt Me]

That is a really good and powerful episode for it's time...
It sure was, kind of shows just how stupid Man is.

[oscillatewildly]

So has there been a 'Native American' President?

[CalBoy]

If I recall correctly Ben Franklin was an atheist

Doesn't really matter though; he never served as President. ;)
And don't forget to add FDR as a new category.

We can't though; FDR's medical status was kept secret from the public until after his death. If we count him, we might have to count Lincoln as LGBT. Openness and honesty count in this, I think.

So has there been a 'Native American' President?

Unlikely. There's a chance that a president has had some Native American ancestors, but I'd bet that the white: Native ratio is heavily on the white side. Up until recent times, you practically had to have an extensive lineage of whiteness to even consider running for the office.

[EricNau]

"In God we trust" sound familiar??
Not sure where you're headed with this, but this phrase first appeared on U.S. coins in 1864, was adopted as our official motto in 1956 (replacing our original de facto motto "E Pluribus Unum"), and first appeared on US paper currency in 1957.

In any case, the phrase "in God we trust" easily post-dates Benjamin Franklin.


We are not a Christian nation, at least we weren't until the 1950's.


We can't though; FDR's medical status was kept secret from the public until after his death. If we count him, we might have to count Lincoln as LGBT. Openness and honesty count in this, I think.
Absolutely. Without full and upfront disclosure prior to the election, it's no indicator of the prejudice of the electorate.

[iJohnHenry]

Not sure where you're headed with this, but this phrase first appeared on U.S. coins in 1864, was adopted as our official motto in 1956 (replacing our original de facto motto "E Pluribus Unum"), and first appeared on US paper currency in 1957.

OK, fair enough. It does pre-date Ben Franklin by many years.

Even The Pledge of Allegiance "one Nation under God" does. :o

Sorry.