Obama And Black America
Tweet
I caught some kind of heck for saying this stuff a few months ago, but maybe from his leadership position people will actually listen to Senator Obama.
Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) is delivering pointed critiques of the African American community as he campaigns for its votes, lamenting that many of his generation are "disenfranchising" themselves because they don’t vote, taking rappers to task for their language, and decrying "anti-intellectualism" in the black community, including black children telling peers who get good grades that they are "acting white."
And yes, this is totally selfish in a collective sort of way, but the strides I believe black America would collectively make forward in having a black president – finally – would be off the charts.
65 Responses to “Obama And Black America”
GOP Rep. Spencer Bachus Facing House Ethics Probe For Insider Trading
Jennifer Aniston Reportedly Pregnant With Twins
PHOTOS: Tamara Ecclestone At The Langham Hotel
Red Front? “Center For American Freedom” Logo Echoes Communist Style
Romney Calls For Defunding Planned Parenthood, Wife Was A Donor
GOP Fundraising Email Asks Supporters To “Knock Out” Obama
Romney Comes Up Limp In Nevada
Obama Opens Lead On Romney In New Poll
Latest Entries
Why Do Liberals Support Drone Strikes?
Weekly Standard Rolls Out The Iraq Argument For Iran
Equal Polarization, My Ass
Some Crazy Stuff That Happened In World War II
Maryland Republican Campaign Funds Used To Defend Voter Suppression
The Obama Jobs Record In One Graph
Martin O’Malley All In For Marriage Equality
Newt Gingrich, Filled With More Excrement Than Your Average Politician
New Year, Powerline Still Stupid
Thanks Again
Meta
Blogroll
Disclaimer
The views on this site are mine and mine alone, and do not reflect the views of my employer, Media Matters for America
© 2000-2011 Oliver Willis
I think you’re right.
It might seem intuitively correct, but in what way(s) might “black America move collectively make forward”?
How does it necessarily follow that a black President would move black America forward?
Isn’t moving black America — as opposed to “all of America” — forward, exactly what about half of America (the Republican half, natch) fears most?
“How does it necessarily follow that a black President would move black America forward?”
Stereotype Threat. Do a little research on it and tyhe answer should be clear.
CSS: I have run out of nerves for you to get on.
Do you have a comment, or are you the self – appointed Blogmaster?
Do you have even the slightest idea what I know about race in America?
Why would you suggest I “do a little research”?
Why don’t you demonstrate that you know your ass from a hole in the ground by making a comment?
Didn’t Bill Cosby catch flack for saying the exact same thing?
Cosby did…I think Oliver’s suggestion is that maybe Obama can make some headway into this matter where Bill could not, because Bill can be dismissed as just a “performer” (as if performers have absolutely nothing of worth to offer).
Obama is going to attempt to move the democrat party forward, not black america. The democrats have done their darndest to keep black america from success, and for good reason.
wealthy blacks vote republican in MUCH higher numbers.
The democrat party likes things the way they are and have no reason to want to try to improve anything that is going to inevitably take voters away from them….
Wealthy everybody votes Republican in higher numbers. African Americans in general tend toward the Democrats, historically speaking.
“Isn’t moving black America — as opposed to “all of America” — forward, exactly what about half of America (the Republican half, natch) fears most?”
Maybe 20 years ago, but that’s a pretty tired assertion these days.
I’m a Republican, and if I didn’t think Obama’s socialist ideas and total lack of a foreign policy/national security platform were and are bad for this country’s future, I’d have no problem with him as President.
Matt, I don’t know how old you are, but 20 years ago, it was better. and 30 years ago, it was better still. Yes, a black person out in your country was treated better in 1977 than he/she is in 2007.
Good post, Ollie.
Black America needs leadership. Hell, AMERICA needs leadership.
We have suffered from disastrous, short-sighted, power-hungry, self-serving, special-interest leadership for the whole time the GOP and Bush have been in power.
It’s time for a leader who understands America, who wants to move everyone foward, not just the powerful or the privileged.
And while Obama’s leadership would carry the most significance to a Black America hungry for a role model, for pride, for a place at the seat of power, ANY of the Dem candidates: Obama, Hillary, Edwards, Richardson, would offer serious, capable leadership.
THAT is why the GOP debate tonight is looking like such a wasteland for the GOP. There’s not a single candidate with a fresh vision or solid leadership for ALL Americans.
It’s all corporatist numbskulls, Conservative numbskulls, or Right-wing numbskulls.
Vote Democratic in ’08, or vote for lots more of what we’ve already been through.
You know Matt, you can feel free to disagree with his security and foreign policy platform, but even a cursory glance at his website will show you that he has thought out and articulated a platform. Saying he “lacks” one is just laziness on your part and on the part of the media.
wealthy blacks vote republican in MUCH higher numbers.
I guess its just too bad for the Republics that there are so few of them.
I agree with Ollie. And Barak. and the Cos. I believe black America would move forward with a black President, in the simple matter of pride. And in true leadership. Black America hasn’t really had a leader in 35 years. Sharpton, Jackson and Farrakan just don’t strike me as the folks I would want to get behind. Reactionary instead of Proactionary (is that a word?).
Matt: I’m a Republican, and if I didn’t think Obama’s socialist ideas and total lack of a foreign policy/national security platform were and are bad for this country’s future, I’d have no problem with him as President.
Obama spells out plenty of his ideas on foreign policy/national security in “The Audacity of Hope”. He also made a major speech to the Chicago Council on Global Affairs on 4/23:
http://link.brightcove.com/services/link/bcpid416308493/bclid769318738/bctid800924299
and
http://link.brightcove.com/services/link/bcpid416308493/bclid769318738/bctid791890585
wealthy blacks vote republican in MUCH higher numbers.
This is simply not true.
Isn’t moving black America — as opposed to “all of America” — forward, exactly what about half of America (the Republican half, natch) fears most?
You said it! And that half has been working hard to prevent it from happening too!
Obama’s a socialist? Fantastic!
So how’s that exactly? Has he actually espoused any socialist beliefs, or is it just that he’s a ways to the left of, say, Rick Santorum?
Since three people mentioned my statement, without seeming to understand its meaning, I will try again.
There are lots of people in America who think blacks have made much progress. They think this because they see black employees by their sides, they think this because they see that their supervisor / manager is black. They see that they have black neighbors. They see that their children have black friends. They can read that the black middle class is growing, in income, faster than the white middle class.
Black and white relationships have improved. So what do people like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, and, for the most part, Oliver Willis, say: Blacks are impoverished and denied education and health care due to white racism, which is, what was that word you used? Encouraged by Republicans.
What is “Joe Six Pack” being offered? Black leadership, to move Black America forward.
What I’m asking you is a two – parter:
1) How do we “move Black America forward” without insulting “Joe Six Pack”, and
2) What does Obama have to offer him?
And, if you call me a racist, I’m not reading the rest of your comment.
If you can’t answer the question, go watch CNN, or read DU, or something.
It was better for blacks in ’77? Really? I gotta disagree with plantsman1. And though I wouldn’t dare speak for them, I have an inkling that Will Smith, Oprah Winfrey, Tiger Woods, & Tony Dungy just might disagree with you.
Heck, didn’t we fire a radio host 2 weeks ago for the unforgivable sin of hurting a black person’s feelings? THAT didn’t happen in ’77.
Typical Right-Wingnut.
“Black America” is Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton.
This ain’t FOX News, Frank.
Black America is Robert Johnson, Oprah Winfrey, Barack Obama, Charlie Rangel, Sheila Jackson-Lee, John Conyers, Magic Johnson, Tiger Woods.
And Black America doesn’t vote Republican.
Inherent in this idea is that Joe Six Pack must be white. Which is not true.
Farris, what Imus did, in public, over the airwaves, would have been almost unthinkable in 1977. Not only that, but the only people who would have had the nerve to protest his firing would have been fringe rightists. In 2007, those fringe rightists are called “mainstream conservatives”.
Er, why would Joe Six Pack be insulted by Black America moving forward? Why wouldn’t he feel as proud and gratified as any black person? No need to answer. Those are rhetorical questions. Although, when I think about it, the answers to those questions may have a lot to do with Black America still being in the position of having to “move forward”.
Typical Right-Wingnut. and blah, blah, blah, yadda, yadda, yadda, blah, blah, blah, yadda, yadda, yadda,.
And there you have it, ladies and gentlemen! The national conversation on race as heard from the left and the right.
And Obama, in the unlikely event he is nominated goes down to worse defeat than Carter, than McGovern, and dare I say it? Than Goldwater.
Your ideas are as dead as the guy you’re named after.
Can anybody answer the question without insinuating that I’m a racist?
You are making my point for me. You labor under the delusion that there is a Black (non – racist, victimized) America, and a white (racist, oppressor) America.
You need to change that meme, whether it is true or not.
OK, try this: Arguendo [go look it up), I’m a racist. I’m an employer, or a school teacher, or a shop keeper. I am white, you are black. I play a role in your life. I play a role (a negative one) in your life.
Across the street from me lives “Joe Six Pack”. He is not a racist. But he is an employer, or a school teacher, or a shop keeper. He is white, and you are black. He plays a role (a positive one) in your life, because he treats kindly and with respect.
What do you do about the first guy, without pissing off the second guy?
Can you think a minute, put the cliches in the back of the closet, and try to get what I’m driving at.
Farris, what Imus did, in public, over the airwaves, would have been almost unthinkable in 1977.
Had this been 1977, Imus would have been fired for NOT saying it. It was very much an Archie Bunker world.
People didn’t start getting fired for being racists for another 10 years (Al Campanis & Jimmy the Greek).
fd10801 — Obama answers that exact question in “The Audacity of Hope” under the chapter simply entitled “Race”. “Audacity” is still #5 on the NYT bestseller non-fiction list after an astounding 17 weeks at #1.
So now I have to buy his book?
Thanks…
fd1081, why would the second guy get pissed off at anything I did about the first guy? What you seem to be saying is that no matter how badly I was wronged by the first guy, I have to tread lightly in doing something about it. I have to tread lightly to keep from pissing off the more moderate second guy. Why? Because tribalism trumps right and wrong?
Farris, the point I was trying to make is that the Imus incident would have been much less likely to happen in 1977. The idea of him saying it would have been so extreme, he wouldn’t have had the nerve. Now, I’m sure it was an “Archie Bunker world” among the people you knew, among yourselves-hell, it will always be that way. But over the national airwaves? It was much, much less likely to happen back then.
Plantsman, you read the question from the wrong perspective.
Imagine you’re President Obama, and you’re trying to rid America of guys like guy#1.
What steps might you take that wouldn’t negatively affect guy #2?
And this: “Now, I’m sure it was an “Archie Bunker world” among the people you knew, among yourselves-hell, it will always be that way”
No, it won’t. And it needn’t be. The solutions are around the corner. The question is (if there is a President Obama) will he speed it up or slow it down?
I guess I just imagined Chevy Chase using the N-word on SNL back in ’76. Or “The Jerk” using it liberally in ’79.
fd, it will always be that way. Our task as black people is to realize that fact, come to terms with it, and take steps to make it not matter. In 1977, civil rights laws were actually enforced. Because of that, it was a bit easier to make you way through the world. If someone discriminated against you, you could be at least somewhat confident that they’d pay a price for doing it.
Farris, there was a difference between the Chevy Chase/Richard Pryor sketch and “The Jerk”, and Imus. You really don’t have anything to gain from pretending there was no difference, so stop wasting your time.
Hell, you couldn’t even say “period” on the air in 1977.
What steps might you take that wouldn’t negatively affect guy #2?
Like plantsman said, make it not matter. More to the point, make guy #1 not matter.
If we will, according to Plantsman. always have guy #1 with us, then he will always matter.
If teachers can decide, “They’re not worth struggling over — they’re not going anywhere but jail anyway”, and the guy in the store thinks, “I’d better watch him — they steal”, and the employer thinks, “I’m not hiring her; she’ll probably quit in six months to have a baby — they pop ‘em out like rabbits!”; what kind of future will that black America have?
The anger at that kind of treatment will never fade, and the justification for white racism will never fade.
It has to stop — somewhere, sometime.
I know I’m older than dirt, but it was changing when I was coming up. It was LBJ that “screwed the pooch”. Malcolm X killed, Watts, Newark, RFK and MLK were killed.
Should it just go on forever?
Let’s see…if a black person becomes angry because he/she has experienced racial discrimination, that in turn justifies anti-black racism. I can’t help noticing that you used the word “justifacation”. Not “rationalization”, but “justification”.
Lord knows those pathologies exist in too large a quantity in Black America. But the people who (sadly) manifest them are a minority of our population. In other words, not enough to justify the treatment you describe above. But yeah, in order to rationalize it, there doesn’t have to be that many, right?
I understand. That’s why I’m more practically oriented, and and I’m not wasting time pining for “racial harmony”, especially since I know that “racial harmony” is a lot like “bipartisanism”, LOL.
The very idea of a white (or any other) person holding me in disdain doesn’t bother me at all. I can live with it. I’m sorry that doesn’t fit your “victim” rationalization..oops, sorry…justification, but that’s the way it is. I have a problem when that person is in a position to apply his/her disdain in a way that injures, and feels “justified” and encouraged in doing so. Still, I don’t feel as if I should kiss that person’s ass to keep him from applying his disdain, and admit it- that’s what you are suggesting we do. Nope, sorry.
I’ll tell you what, plantsman — I’ll come back when you put the race card away.
See you… never.
I’ll keep this simple. I somewhat agree with you Oliver on the main point. I hope he continues this line of thought, whether President or not. He seems to use the “pulpit” very well, and I hope it has an affect.
Interviewer: Alright, Mr. Wilson, you’ve done just fine on the Rorshact.. your papers are in good order.. your file’s fine.. no difficulties with your motor skills.. And I think you’re probably ready for this job. We’ve got one more psychological test we always do here. It’s just a Word Association. I’ll throw you out a few words – anything that comes to your mind, just throw back at me, okay? It’s kind of an arbitrary thing. Like, if I say “dog”, you’d say..?
Mr. Wilson: “Tree”.
Interviewer: “Tree”. [ nods head, prepares the test papers ] “Dog”.
Mr. Wilson: “Tree”.
Interviewer: “Fast”.
Mr. Wilson: “Slow”.
Interviewer: “Rain”.
Mr. Wilson: “Snow”.
Interviewer: “White”.
Mr. Wilson: “Black”.
Interviewer: “Bean”.
Mr. Wilson: “Pod”.
Interviewer: [ casually ] “Negro”.
Mr. Wilson: “Whitey”.
Interviewer: “Tarbaby”.
Mr. Wilson: [ silent, sure he didn't hear what he thinks he heard ] What’d you say?
Interviewer: [ repeating ] “Tarbaby”.
Mr. Wilson: “Ofay”.
Interviewer: “Colored”.
Mr. Wilson: “Redneck”.
Interviewer: “Junglebunny”.
Mr. Wilson: [ starting to get angry ] “Peckerwood!”
Interviewer: “Burrhead”.
Mr. Wilson: [ defensive ] “Cracker!”
Interviewer: [ aggressive ] “Spearchucker”.
Mr. Wilson: “White trash!”
Interviewer: “Jungle Bunny!”
Mr. Wilson: [ upset ] “Honky!”
Interviewer: “Spade!
Mr. Wilson: [ really upset ] “Honky Honky!”
Interviewer: [ relentless ] “Nigger!”
Mr. Wilson: [ immediate ] “Dead honky!” [ face starts to flinch ]
Interviewer: [ quickly wraps the interview up ] Okay, Mr. Wilson, I think you’re qualified for this job. How about a starting salary of $5,000?
Mr. Wilson: Your momma!
Interviewer: [ fumbling ] Uh.. $7,500 a year?
Mr. Wilson: Your grandmomma!
Interviewer: [ desperate ] $15,000, Mr. Wilson. You’ll be the highest paid janitor in America. Just, don’t.. don’t hurt me, please..
Mr. Wilson: Okay.
Interviewer: [ relieved ] Okay.
Mr. Wilson: You want me to start now?
Interviewer: Oh, no, no.. that’s alright. I’ll clean all this up. Take a couple of weeks off, you look tired.
[ fade ]
_____________________________
Of course, in 2007, after Pryor said “Dead honky!”, Chase would have whined disingenously, “But..but..you call each other that”.
Let’s say I walked into the kind of C&W bar depicted in “Borat” and called everyone a bunch of rednecks. I wouldn’t get out of there alive. And yet, isn’t it strange how a certain segment of American society just out-and-out revels in referring to themselves and their brethren as “rednecks”. It would be disingenuous of me to pretend I don’t understand exactly why they do that.
Wow, I say that a white person holding me in disdain doen’t bother me, and you say I’m playing the race card. fd, I’m not the one who’s holding onto something. Ah, well…as I said, I’m sorry I don’t become a pitiable mass of jelly at the thought of not being liked because I’m black. Man, I thought you guys wanted us NOT to be victims, and yet…hm.
Plantsman: Nice cherry picking {wanted to be sure I got that right, lest I offend}
Let’s look at what you said, shall we?
Let’s see…if a black person becomes angry because he/she has experienced racial discrimination, that in turn justifies anti-black racism. I can’t help noticing that you used the word “justifacation”. Not “rationalization”, but “justification”.
Lord knows those pathologies exist in too large a quantity in Black America. But the people who (sadly) manifest them are a minority of our population. In other words, not enough to justify the treatment you describe above. But yeah, in order to rationalize it, there doesn’t have to be that many, right?
I understand. That’s why I’m more practically oriented, and and I’m not wasting time pining for “racial harmony”, especially since I know that “racial harmony” is a lot like “bipartisanism”, LOL.
The very idea of a white (or any other) person holding me in disdain doesn’t bother me at all. I can live with it. I’m sorry that doesn’t fit your “victim” rationalization..oops, sorry…justification, but that’s the way it is. I have a problem when that person is in a position to apply his/her disdain in a way that injures, and feels “justified” and encouraged in doing so. Still, I don’t feel as if I should kiss that person’s ass to keep him from applying his disdain, and admit it- that’s what you are suggesting we do. Nope, sorry
So,you see, you may not become a ” become a pitiable mass of jelly at the thought of not being liked because [you're] black”, but you get real worked up over the difference between a simple choice of words.
What I was referring to was simple enough: White racists (whether there are few or many) can affect many, many black folks. When those black folks express their anger elsewhere, then white folks can feel that their innate racism, which temptation they are struggling to suppress, is either justified or rationalized (like the difference matters).
This cycle can be broken. But the first thing that has to happen is that both sides of the disagreement have to at least become aware of how their behavior is perceived by the other side.
In couple therapy, you don’t start by establishing “good guy” / “bad guy”. You start with, “Why do each of you think you are here?” Then from the ‘blame game’ (the game whites and blacks are playing nowadays), you move on (up?) to “do you know how the other person feels?”
It’s pretty clear to me that most black folks don’t know how white folks feel, and most white folks don’t know how black folks feel.
So that’s where you begin.
That’s where you begin.
Not with, “You callin’ me names, motherfucker”?
I quit playing that 50 years ago.
I wasn’t “worked up” over it, fd. That’s the thing, don’tcha see? The only way I can come off as not “worked up” to you is if I didn’t point it out. If I just took it, on your terms, and yours only. You and Dear Leader have the same misunderstanding of the word compromise. You threatened not to darken the door of this blog again precisely because (damn, Oliver, you need italics here, lol) I didn’t get worked up. I shouldn’t be too harsh, because a lot of this is probably subconscious with you. This is what happened: you expressed your disdain for black folks in what you thought was a subtle, subversive way, and I said simply said “uh, ok”. At that point YOU couldn’t handle it, because goddamnit, it’s not as much fun if a black man’s nose is not pressed against the window, and he’s not yearning, yearning, to get in. It’s also much better he flies off the handle, confirming that “those people are just too emotional”. No, it’s about taking a cold, hard, unemotional, unsentimental look at what the situation has been, is and will be…and as you said, going from there. It’s not about dreaming of some utopia that will never come to pass. Given that you conservatives are emphatically not utopians, you should be able to understand. Sorry, fd. Can’t do it. Believe it or not, I actually feel a twinge of a desire to make you feel comfortable in your entitlement. I mean, we’re both human, I do feel empathy, and I know you need that comfort. But man, if it involves me giving up a piece of MY humanity…ain’t gone happen. Again…sorry.
I pasted that script from the 1970′s SNL sketch because someone else brought it up, and simply said they remembered Chevy Chase using the word nigger. I just wanted to supply a little bit of context for the younguns here who may not have seen it.
“This cycle can be broken. But the first thing that has to happen is that both sides of the disagreement have to at least become aware of how their behavior is perceived by the other side”
fd, I don’t have perceptions of the behavior white people as a group. However, I do observe the behavior of individuals. Can you truly say that? if you can, bravo. Do you think people who do cast aspersions on a whole group of people because of the actions of a few should be given a pass, or are they “justified”?
Save Farris said:
Had this been 1977, Imus would have been fired for NOT saying it. It was very much an Archie Bunker world.
Not everywhere.
Here in Baltimore, there was a major blizzard in early 1978. Unfortunately, some hooligans in the Reservoir Hill section used it as an excuse for looting. Around that same time, a black WMAR-TV news anchor went on disability leave with a bad back.
Johnnie Walker, a jock on WFBR-AM’s “Mad Radio,” joked on-air that the anchorman probably hurt his back “carrying a TV on Whitelock St” – implying that he’d been among the looters.
Outrage extensive. Walker’s career over, at least in Baltimore.
Thus, even back then it sometimes was possible to silence a smartass…
Plantsman:
To make italics type “”, followed by the text you want italicized, and then “”
Boldface can be made by replacing “i” with “b”.
Thank you!
The only way I can come off as not “worked up” to you is if I didn’t point it out
Of course, there’s no middle ground between not mentioning it at all, and, what, about a half a dozen sentences?
Sorry, I’m not buying it. And I’m not owning it, either. Everyone stereotypes. Everyone stereotypes, because it’s a way of gathering information.
Everybody knows where Africa is, but how many people can name 5 central African countries?
Remember when I said lots of black folks don’t know about white folks? How deep a hole are you going to dig for yourself, without questioning my credentials?
What do I know about black folks?
Where did I learn it?
You don’t care, right?
I’m “just white”
I didn’t “threaten not to darken the door of this blog again”. I meant that I wasn’t going to talk to someone who thinks I’m a racist — whatever color you are.
I didn’t express my “disdain for black folks” in way, shape or form.
If you think so, then either I and you have a problem, or you have a problem, and I don’t.
I hope you’re not thinking I have a problem, and you don’t.
See, this is where things have to change. People getting along doesn’t involve giving up your humanity, it involves your acknowledging mine, and my acknowledging yours.
You really think conservatives aren’t Utopian? What makes you think that black folks and white folks getting along is Utopian?
“CSS: I have run out of nerves for you to get on.
Do you have a comment, or are you the self – appointed Blogmaster?
Do you have even the slightest idea what I know about race in America?
Why would you suggest I “do a little research”?
Why don’t you demonstrate that you know your ass from a hole in the ground by making a comment?”
Jesus Christ, Frank, you really are losing it.
I told you to do a little research on Stereotype Threat because it would answer your question. However, the topic is a little too broad for discussion in this forum, which is why I suggested YOU do the research.
I had a couple other suggestions, but after reading this thread I have only one thing to say to you…
Leave this site and never come back. Seriously. You are in danger of doing real harm to yourself by staying here. I’ve seen people just like you go over the edge and it’s never a pretty sight.
CSS: While I am doing my best to appreciate your concern, I am having trouble distinguishing it from sarcasm, condescension, and general snarkiness.
I checked very quickly on stereotype threat, and I can only guess what YOU think it has to do with anything.
Can’t you demonstrate a connection between stereotype threat and whatever point YOU are making, instead of hoping that I’ll keep reading until I stumble upon it?
Your scary cryptic admonitions are only demonstrating to me that you are a hyperventilating “Drama Queen” (and, no, I am not calling you gay — merely histrionic)
Isn’t, “Leave this site and never come back. Seriously,” just a tiny bit dramatic.
I have an idea. Since you find my behavior so disturbing, help me out. Give me the benefit of your guidance. Keep me from “going over the edge”.
Stereotype threat is a social-psychological threat that arises when one is in the situation of doing something for which a negative stereotype about his/her group applies.
Are you saying that the Presidency of Barack Obama would curtail or eliminate stereotype threat? First, it seems to be an individualized reaction to a group stereotype, meaning, in my view, that there is no way of telling if there will be any effect, or what that effect will be.
But secondly, and more importantly, why didn’t we see a reduction or curtailment in stereotype threat when Justice Clarence Thomas seceded Justice Thurgood Marshall; or when Secretary Condoleezza Rice seceded Secretary Colin Powell?
I’m curious, and social psychology is one of those subjects that I have always wanted time to investigate.
But you want me to leave. Now. Seriously.
So you might not answer.
C’est la vie
fd10801…
Re: “The Audacity of Hope”, I think you can borrow it from your local library pretty much for free.
RaisingPaine: The local library? Is that where they keep all the books?
Do you want to send them a check for my overdue fines, or do you want to send the money to me?
Not to mention the fact that I’m in Graduate School, and Sen. Obama is not on the reading list.
But thanks for all your help…
you move on (up?)
Was that a Jeffersons reference?
why didn’t we see a reduction or curtailment in stereotype threat when Justice Clarence Thomas seceded Justice Thurgood Marshall; or when Secretary Condoleezza Rice seceded Secretary Colin Powell?
Perhaps because “douchebaggery” trumps race every time.
duros62: I hate to be a wet blanket, but I don’t find this topic amusing.
So in reference to your first comment, that was meant to suggest a choice of words — “on” or “up”.
In the case of your second comment, it is nothing more than tragic that the second black Supreme Court is treated with scorn, when the first was treated like the Black Messiah.
Secretary of State Rice, a black woman, was voted The Most Powerful Woman In the World.
Let me repeat that for you: Secretary of State Rice, a black woman, was voted The Most Powerful Woman In the World.
Two. Years. In. A. Row.
You call that “douchebaggery”.
And I suppose you consider yourself “liberal ‘on race’”.
I don’t see your point, fd. If a white woman was the U.S. Secretary of State, she’d be the most powerful woman in the world. I guess I’m not liberal when it comes to black people either.
Plantsman: To the best of my knowledge, Madeline Albright, the whole time she was Secretary of State, was not one of the “World’s 100 Most powerful Women”.
My point was that I was speculating as to what Strowbridge perceived to be significant about “stereotype threat”. He wouldn’t elaborate on it, so I was guessing that he was suggesting that black folks, when confronted with stress, respond poorly because they fear being perceived as their negative stereotype.
So, I was asking, “Why wasn’t it a sign of potential success (for all blacks) when Secretary Condoleezza Rice and Justice Clarence Thomas were so successful”?
As you see, he never answered.
Unfortunately, Duros’ answer might have been closer to the truth than even he realized. They certainly were of the right color to be praised, but perhaps they were of the wrong ideology.
Shorter Frank: I know black people.
“I checked very quickly on stereotype threat, and I can only guess what YOU think it has to do with anything.”
You walk into a classroom and tell the kids that people with blue eyes can’t do math and then give them a math test. The kids with blue eyes will do poorer on the test than the otherwise would.
Conversely, you walk into a classroom and tell the kids that people with blue eyes are better at math and then give them a math test. The kids with blue eyes will do better on the test than the otherwise would.
Likewise, you have a black president as a role model, and a lot more black people will do better in school because they will have that psychological edge.
“Isn’t, “Leave this site and never come back. Seriously,” just a tiny bit dramatic.”
No. I’ve seen people completely snap from Usenet flame wars. (I knew his brother, you sound a lot like Timothy Jones before his breakdown.
I’ve read about people who got into a ski vs. snowboard flame war that go so out of hand, that a judge banned them from the Internet, forever.
Well, from the perspective of the large majority of black America, they don’t deserve praise because they have aligned themselves with our enemies. It’s as simple as that.
enlightened liberal: You’re not even funny, I don’t know what you are.
CSS: So, what happened to my question? Didn’t that happen with Justice Thomas and Secretary Rice?
If not, why not?
You think I was in a flame war?
Shoot, you ain’t seen nothin’!
You should have been here when “s” and JK were in their prime!
I’ve never heard of Timothy Jones? You think he ever had POW Training?
I just looked up some things on this Timothy Jones character…
You’re really comparing me to him?
You’re fucking crazy!
“So, what happened to my question? Didn’t that happen with Justice Thomas and Secretary Rice?
If not, why not?”
Cause they’re Republicans. Remember, Rush Limbaugh is also a Republican and he recently air a song called, Barack the Magic Negro. (And going further back you have Trent Lott, Strom Thurman, etc.) Not really a good record of race relations there.
So, stereotype threat is also about politics, as well.
So the the “stereotype threat breaker” must be an Afro – American Democratic President.
So, if I were to say to you, or Plantsman, or Oliver: “Here are a group of people we identify as “__________ – American”. They suffer from failure quite often due to “stereotype threat”.
“Their best chance for a generalized removal of “__________ – American” stereotype threat would be if we had a “__________ – American” President, who would have to be a Republican, because they don’t trust Democrats”, what would your reaction be?
Would you be thinking, “If that’s what it takes to remove the ‘stereotype threat’, then let’s get a Republican President as soon as we can?”
lxynohfki cgisvjomf nmtwsgx gpxuqvht yfqraek iwex saeznl