’)Obama Takes 1st Step in Presidential Bid
Democratic Sen. Barack Obama said Tuesday he is taking the initial step in a presidential bid that could make him the nation’s first black to occupy the White House.
Obama announced on his Web site, http://www.barackobama.com, that he was filing a presidential exploratory committee. He said he would announce more about his plans in his home state of Illinois on Feb. 10.
My name is Barack. I come from the future to ask you the unwilling (the American people) to perform the improbable (bring the political parties together) to bring about the unlikely (the “solutions” to America’s “problems”).
If this is not done, I and my companion, Klaatu, will return and destroy your planet.
I thought you were only allowed to make fun of his middle and last names.
Obama is half black, half white. All we ever hear, though, is that he’s black. Every now and then in a quick bio, they say his mother was white, and from Kansas. That’s it. Now he is just black, apparently. The white just went away? Why is it that everytime someone makes a racial identification of Barack Obama, it is that he is black, period?
Historically, in America, one was considered “black” if one had so much as 1/64th black ancestry. Pretty much any black blood made one a “mulatto”, whic for all intents and purposes, was the same as black.
Rheinhard, Shane’s question was rhetorical, and you know exactly what he meant.
If you didn’t, I’ll spell it out for you: Young black guy running for President = Yippee – ki – yi – yay!
Young white guy running for President, Mommy from Kansas, Daddy from Africa = Ho – hum…
Klaatu Barana Nikto!
Tiger Woods is of mixed parentage too, he’s black. As is my cousin, who considers himself black.
…and Tiger Woods is also Asian. To make another example of the puzzling issue may help broaden the discussion, but it sure doesn’t help answer my question. (Not to be ungrateful for the comments, mind you.) Rhein’s mention of the mulatto thing is actually very applicable for this discussion. Why is it, even in a time when a man who is half black has a good shot at the presidency, that we still must be polarized along a black/white racial line? Perhaps actually succeeding at getting a “black” in the white house will help in that regard.
Especially if he turns out to be a self-servient, anti-gay, pandering bigot.
Um, most people in the U.S. who self-identify as black have some white ancestry. The number of people in this country of purely African heritage is exceedingly small.
So you want to claim that nobody is actually black?
Barack Obama chooses to identify himself as a black male. Now can we move on from this god damned stupid derailment?
When I vote for him, it will not be because he is black or white or mulatto. I will vote for him because he is a great candidate. Besides, I believe people should define themselves, not be defined by other’s perceptions of their race.
LC – ???
QB – No, but someone who is clearly biracial is defined by all as black, everytime. Why? That’s the question. Seems like an extension of the logic that Rhein described in his post. Still have a ways to go, I think.
NG – If you don’t like the discussion, don’t add your goddamn stupid comments.
Michelle – Thankyou. Very well put, and that is part of my point. He should be defined by his great character, not always as “a black”.
He’s a bridge between cultures, like James Brown, or Elvis…..
Also, please look at my picture. Both of my parents are black Jamaicans, but it ain’t like our bloodline is “pure”.
Michelle :: Your comment would make more sense if there were anyone who believed that he is not getting the attention he is getting because he is black.
He’s sure not saying anything special.
No, but someone who is clearly biracial is defined by all as black, everytime. Why?
Um, because he identifies himself as black?
Back up and read the thread again, Shane. Practically every person who identifies as black is actually multi-racial. Would you choose to define away “blackness” as a result of that?
Of course not, QB. I simply find it telling that, even for as far as we’ve come, that folks are still instantly labeled black who are actually biracial. I’m not talking about someone who had a white great great great grandpa and has never met their white family, but someone who is actually half, or sometimes even less, of African descent, and has spent a great deal of time with both sides of the family.
For example (though it be a poor one, maybe it will help me explain), I am both German and Scots Irish. Those are my primary bloodlines. There is some Indian and Swiss in there, but that’s a long ways back. I have no problem saying that I am German and Scots Irish, and I don’t think folks would start calling me a German all the time just because I said that I was, especially when it is known that I am both German and Scots Irish. They would probably say that I was German and Scots Irish. Because we are still so fixated on black/white polarization in this country, however, a person who is both black and white is instantly identified as black, period.
Whether he publicly identifies himself as black is his choice (maybe I was getting a glass of water everytime he identified himself as black, but ok). The public, however, always identifies him as black, no problem, it comes so naturally. I don’t think the media was checking to make sure he identified himself as such before saying he was a black senator.
Of course, he grew up in a time where he probably felt significantly more discrimination than kids today. I believe there will be less and less over time. Part of that change will hopefully be that someone who is biracial won’t simply be identified as black, because I think that some people define biracials as black only, as though they want to say that the person no longer belongs with their European folks. This is a continuation of the disregard that Rhein described in his post early on.
Also, I have no data to back this up, but I believe that you are wrong about the “practically every person” bit. There are lots of black Americans with Indian or European blood somewhere wayyyy back there, just as there are plenty of white Americans with Indian blood, but I don’t think it’s the majority that you make it out to be.
I believe that you are wrong about the “practically every person” bit.
There was a really good show on PBS a while back that explored the question in detail. That’s my source. If I’m wrong, I misunderstood what they said.
Here it is. That’s the “African American Lives” show that talked about DNA research and genealogy of black Americans.
Sounds like a very cool program. Thanks for the link. Looks like I am wrong, especially if they are using genetics. Kind of hard to argue against dna.
Wait, Obama’s black?
I hadn’t noticed.