“Default” racism

Barack Obama looks like he’s going to annouce that he’s running for President (Beet.TV has a link to the news, along with news about how Barack is using online video). Already most of the press (and most political bloggers) have decided that the race for Democratic nominee is between three people: Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and John Edwards.

I’m getting pissed off about something I’ve noticed in my conversations. No, not when people tell me they either don’t know enough about Barack, or think he’s not experienced enough. That’s quite acceptable at this stage in the game.

But I’m throwing a little test into the conversation. I then follow up a comment like that with this: “I think he isn’t going to get elected because of the color of his skin.”

What follows my statement is what really pisses me off: I haven’t had many people disagree with me. Admittedly small sample size, but now more than 100 people.

That’s what I call “default” racism. You might call it “invisible” racism. Or something else. But it still is racism. If someone says something racist to you, and you don’t disagree, aren’t you also racist by default?

It’s also interesting that I haven’t seen the major political blogs, or Web sites, take on the issue of race and the 2008 candidacy.

Oh, and what does this have to do with technology? Not much until I start remembering my Silicon Valley childhood when I was my son’s age. I remember a neighborhood family coming around to my parents asking “we’re thinking of selling our home to a black family and wanted to let you know about it.”

I’m sick of the default. What about you?

Advertisements

183 thoughts on ““Default” racism

  1. I think the lack of answer is not automatically racism, it depends on the context.

    2 liberals who like candidate “A” might share the same sentiment, “Yeah, I would love A to be president, but I am voting for B in the primary because A is too liberal.”

    If you, Scoble, said something like “too bad Obama won’t make it” I would not impugn racist motive, I would take it as a possibly pragmatic statement given the reactionary nature of so much of the electorate. Though I might say, “hey, if he were a right-wing nutjob, maybe he would have a chance.”

    Like

  2. I think the lack of answer is not automatically racism, it depends on the context.

    2 liberals who like candidate “A” might share the same sentiment, “Yeah, I would love A to be president, but I am voting for B in the primary because A is too liberal.”

    If you, Scoble, said something like “too bad Obama won’t make it” I would not impugn racist motive, I would take it as a possibly pragmatic statement given the reactionary nature of so much of the electorate. Though I might say, “hey, if he were a right-wing nutjob, maybe he would have a chance.”

    Like

  3. “I think he isn’t going to get elected because of the color of his skin.”

    Your comment makes a statement and assumes a conversational position. It’s not a question. Might you be unintentionally forcing a point? Try asking a question that encourages people to express their own opinion without stating your own, rather than making a statement; I think possibly people tend to follow your lead, because you are vocal thought leader of sorts. It would be interesting to see if the question-based approach would change the “stats.”

    For my part, I disagree. His personality is strong, and I seriously think core personality will define the game the next time around.

    Like

  4. “I think he isn’t going to get elected because of the color of his skin.”

    Your comment makes a statement and assumes a conversational position. It’s not a question. Might you be unintentionally forcing a point? Try asking a question that encourages people to express their own opinion without stating your own, rather than making a statement; I think possibly people tend to follow your lead, because you are vocal thought leader of sorts. It would be interesting to see if the question-based approach would change the “stats.”

    For my part, I disagree. His personality is strong, and I seriously think core personality will define the game the next time around.

    Like

  5. Solo: true, but that’s not what I’ve been saying. I keep bringing up race as an issue that’s going to keep him out, and most people don’t disagree. Of course, no one agrees that THEY are racist, just that other people’s racism is going to play a factor. Of course, if anyone actually is racist themselves they’ve learned to keep it quiet and hide it under excuses like “he’s not experienced enough.”

    Like

  6. Solo: true, but that’s not what I’ve been saying. I keep bringing up race as an issue that’s going to keep him out, and most people don’t disagree. Of course, no one agrees that THEY are racist, just that other people’s racism is going to play a factor. Of course, if anyone actually is racist themselves they’ve learned to keep it quiet and hide it under excuses like “he’s not experienced enough.”

    Like

  7. Greg: I usually bring this up after asking a half-dozen other questions to find out what people believe. Like I said, no one offers up a racist position up front. They just agree with it, when offered. One guy even said “you think Tennessee is going to elect a black guy? No way.”

    Racism in this country is “someone else’s doing.” I find that very interesting. Yes, it’s an improvement over the kind of outward racism this country faced in the 1950s, but we still have a long way to go to be colorblind.

    By the way, not a single person has told me that they like Hillary. Including three self-avowed feminists. Most use very visceral words to describe Hillary. Hate. Dislike. Distrust. Etc.

    It’ll be really interesting to see how my little focus group matches up with polls.

    Like

  8. Greg: I usually bring this up after asking a half-dozen other questions to find out what people believe. Like I said, no one offers up a racist position up front. They just agree with it, when offered. One guy even said “you think Tennessee is going to elect a black guy? No way.”

    Racism in this country is “someone else’s doing.” I find that very interesting. Yes, it’s an improvement over the kind of outward racism this country faced in the 1950s, but we still have a long way to go to be colorblind.

    By the way, not a single person has told me that they like Hillary. Including three self-avowed feminists. Most use very visceral words to describe Hillary. Hate. Dislike. Distrust. Etc.

    It’ll be really interesting to see how my little focus group matches up with polls.

    Like

  9. On the other hand, their response may not be racist but realist.

    One may think he’s a smashing chap, cast a vote for him perhaps, but still acknowledge that large parts of the electorate will not vote for him purely due to the colour of his skin.

    However, I do hope they’d express regret that your statement may be true…

    Like

  10. On the other hand, their response may not be racist but realist.

    One may think he’s a smashing chap, cast a vote for him perhaps, but still acknowledge that large parts of the electorate will not vote for him purely due to the colour of his skin.

    However, I do hope they’d express regret that your statement may be true…

    Like

  11. Perhaps people agree with you not because they are racists but because they assume that the “other” US voters will not phone for Mr. Obama because of the color of his skin. I suppose you could call that implicit racism.
    Things are off course completely different when you say to people: “I think he should not be elected because of the color of his skin”. That’s racism, 100%.

    Like

  12. Perhaps people agree with you not because they are racists but because they assume that the “other” US voters will not phone for Mr. Obama because of the color of his skin. I suppose you could call that implicit racism.
    Things are off course completely different when you say to people: “I think he should not be elected because of the color of his skin”. That’s racism, 100%.

    Like

  13. I think there is a substansive difference between “I don’t think he’ll be elected because the color of his skin” and “I wouldn’t vote for him because of the color of his skin.”

    One is racist. One isn’t necessarily. For instance, I am by no means racist, but I also don’t believe he would win because he is black. Why? Because a huge part of this country is still staggaringly backward and has all sorts of ‘passive racism.’ I don’t know much about you or where you come from, Robert, but I’ve spent the vast majority of my life in the midwest – and it’s still pretty bad here in ‘red state land.’

    Of those three – Obama or Edwards would have my vote. But I don’t think we’ll see a black president for a long time, still. Not for another generation or so. Too many old racists have to die first.

    Like

  14. I think there is a substansive difference between “I don’t think he’ll be elected because the color of his skin” and “I wouldn’t vote for him because of the color of his skin.”

    One is racist. One isn’t necessarily. For instance, I am by no means racist, but I also don’t believe he would win because he is black. Why? Because a huge part of this country is still staggaringly backward and has all sorts of ‘passive racism.’ I don’t know much about you or where you come from, Robert, but I’ve spent the vast majority of my life in the midwest – and it’s still pretty bad here in ‘red state land.’

    Of those three – Obama or Edwards would have my vote. But I don’t think we’ll see a black president for a long time, still. Not for another generation or so. Too many old racists have to die first.

    Like

  15. Robert I value you, but you have made a terrible mistake in judgment here. It is not racist or more properly “racism” to believe that one person by the color of their skin, hair, beauty, breast size or any other such “outward characteristic” is at an advantage or disadvantage to someone else. These are social concerns you may have and may be legitimate, but they are not racist.

    Racism is believing that a “race” is inherently better or worse than another based on a genetic predisposition. When we act upon those beliefs by limiting others toward employment or the use of public facilities and so on we act illegally. It however, is still not necessarily racism. It is about underlying assumptions that determine if something is racist. Which you do not know, if you do not ask. In fact, your little test at others expense is more ethically challenging then their belief that someone may have a cultural, psychological or social advantage to another based on how they look.

    It is naive and even perhaps disingenuous to “label” them as being “default” or “invisible” racists for such a belief. Your actions and assumptions about the true nature of your test group’s underlying beliefs without having them
    “qualified” is far more troubling in the end. I would go so far as to say, that you have a bias (not racism) toward a particular view. If we do not move the debate beyond what amounts here to “name calling” the problems only intensify, but most importantly never move into the substantive debate that they need to.

    As an explosive example: when the American public believes statements such as “Islam is a peaceful religion.” Do you believe that? On what basis? Is that Robert “invisible” or “default” racism. What if the facts were not true? What if basic beliefs of Islam viewed others who were not muslim as sub-human and unfit as they? You see, I do not know your view on Islam. What I do know is that many have a cultural predisposition to defend it as peaceful when it may be explicitly something other than that for sake of argument. But “culturaly” many of us are predisposed to think otherwise. It is what makes our nation great and at times ignorant beyond measure. Labeling people red state/blue state; right wing/left wing wakos; black/white; Jew/Muslim/Christian and really having little understanding of their motives is what is terribly wrong here. That is not racist either. It is ignorant and stupid. How many people believe they know Pres. Bush’s motives are corrupt in his actions? How do we know this? How do you know that Islam is peaceful? Or that homosexuals are all pedophiles? Are these statements based in some empirical truth? Of course not, they are rants by people who espouse them out of their own cultural influences and choices–rarely on fact.

    I think the best place to look for invisible racism as you call it is at our own front door not others unless you to be judged.

    Like

  16. Robert I value you, but you have made a terrible mistake in judgment here. It is not racist or more properly “racism” to believe that one person by the color of their skin, hair, beauty, breast size or any other such “outward characteristic” is at an advantage or disadvantage to someone else. These are social concerns you may have and may be legitimate, but they are not racist.

    Racism is believing that a “race” is inherently better or worse than another based on a genetic predisposition. When we act upon those beliefs by limiting others toward employment or the use of public facilities and so on we act illegally. It however, is still not necessarily racism. It is about underlying assumptions that determine if something is racist. Which you do not know, if you do not ask. In fact, your little test at others expense is more ethically challenging then their belief that someone may have a cultural, psychological or social advantage to another based on how they look.

    It is naive and even perhaps disingenuous to “label” them as being “default” or “invisible” racists for such a belief. Your actions and assumptions about the true nature of your test group’s underlying beliefs without having them
    “qualified” is far more troubling in the end. I would go so far as to say, that you have a bias (not racism) toward a particular view. If we do not move the debate beyond what amounts here to “name calling” the problems only intensify, but most importantly never move into the substantive debate that they need to.

    As an explosive example: when the American public believes statements such as “Islam is a peaceful religion.” Do you believe that? On what basis? Is that Robert “invisible” or “default” racism. What if the facts were not true? What if basic beliefs of Islam viewed others who were not muslim as sub-human and unfit as they? You see, I do not know your view on Islam. What I do know is that many have a cultural predisposition to defend it as peaceful when it may be explicitly something other than that for sake of argument. But “culturaly” many of us are predisposed to think otherwise. It is what makes our nation great and at times ignorant beyond measure. Labeling people red state/blue state; right wing/left wing wakos; black/white; Jew/Muslim/Christian and really having little understanding of their motives is what is terribly wrong here. That is not racist either. It is ignorant and stupid. How many people believe they know Pres. Bush’s motives are corrupt in his actions? How do we know this? How do you know that Islam is peaceful? Or that homosexuals are all pedophiles? Are these statements based in some empirical truth? Of course not, they are rants by people who espouse them out of their own cultural influences and choices–rarely on fact.

    I think the best place to look for invisible racism as you call it is at our own front door not others unless you to be judged.

    Like

  17. Jack: I appreciate what you’re saying. I don’t agree with it all, but that’s OK.

    If this starts a conversation that helps us get to a better place (and that means me) then it won’t have been a terrible misjudgment at all.

    Like

  18. Jack: I appreciate what you’re saying. I don’t agree with it all, but that’s OK.

    If this starts a conversation that helps us get to a better place (and that means me) then it won’t have been a terrible misjudgment at all.

    Like

  19. “America will not vote for a Black President.”

    “America will not vote for a female President.”

    From what I see, and talking to my froends across the water, one of these statements is politically incorrect, has inherent racism, and at least people acknowledge it for what it is (even though it is ‘other people’ who think it), The other is flatly accepted across the board.

    I wonder what would happen if (theoretically) a candidate declared his sexuality? Would you be comfortable or not comfortable hearing “America will not vote for a Gay President?”

    Like

  20. “America will not vote for a Black President.”

    “America will not vote for a female President.”

    From what I see, and talking to my froends across the water, one of these statements is politically incorrect, has inherent racism, and at least people acknowledge it for what it is (even though it is ‘other people’ who think it), The other is flatly accepted across the board.

    I wonder what would happen if (theoretically) a candidate declared his sexuality? Would you be comfortable or not comfortable hearing “America will not vote for a Gay President?”

    Like

  21. Robert, if you said that to me, I wouldn’t argue, I would tightly smile and back away from you slowly, even though I disagree with the premise. It’s very difficult to argue the racism out of people. When you make a leading statement like that, it’s more civil to just leave the conversation and privately think you’re an asshole than call you out publicly. Your method of market research could be improved.

    Like

  22. Robert, if you said that to me, I wouldn’t argue, I would tightly smile and back away from you slowly, even though I disagree with the premise. It’s very difficult to argue the racism out of people. When you make a leading statement like that, it’s more civil to just leave the conversation and privately think you’re an asshole than call you out publicly. Your method of market research could be improved.

    Like

  23. M. here’s a place where ASCII text isn’t doing my methods justice. But, not a single person did what you say you’d do. They all actively stayed engaged in the conversation. Some, even, engaged more after racism was on the table. Others listened and said “you’re right.”

    I wasn’t doing it for market research. I was trying to learn about what the hot points are in politics just in case PodTech decides to fund a political site.

    Like

  24. M. here’s a place where ASCII text isn’t doing my methods justice. But, not a single person did what you say you’d do. They all actively stayed engaged in the conversation. Some, even, engaged more after racism was on the table. Others listened and said “you’re right.”

    I wasn’t doing it for market research. I was trying to learn about what the hot points are in politics just in case PodTech decides to fund a political site.

    Like

  25. I think that when racism is not turning into discrimination there is no problem. Racism is about peoples “inside” feelings and know body else can control them. To be honest I’m sick of leftist shit trying to be political correct. Let us be free to be racist and distinguish the beauties of difference!

    Like

  26. I think that when racism is not turning into discrimination there is no problem. Racism is about peoples “inside” feelings and know body else can control them. To be honest I’m sick of leftist shit trying to be political correct. Let us be free to be racist and distinguish the beauties of difference!

    Like

  27. Sounds to me as if what you’re eliciting is elitism: your respondents are implying “*I’m* cool, I’ll vote regardless of skin color or sex, but I don’t think the majority is as cool as I am.”

    “I wonder what would happen if (theoretically) a candidate declared his sexuality? Would you be comfortable or not comfortable hearing “America will not vote for a Gay President?” ”

    What we already know is that more Americans would vote for a gay president than an atheist: http://tinyurl.com/p6npl

    Like

  28. Sounds to me as if what you’re eliciting is elitism: your respondents are implying “*I’m* cool, I’ll vote regardless of skin color or sex, but I don’t think the majority is as cool as I am.”

    “I wonder what would happen if (theoretically) a candidate declared his sexuality? Would you be comfortable or not comfortable hearing “America will not vote for a Gay President?” ”

    What we already know is that more Americans would vote for a gay president than an atheist: http://tinyurl.com/p6npl

    Like

  29. As previous commenters have mentioned, simply stating that you think someone won’t win because of the colour of their skin isn’t being racist. Thats just commenting on what you think will happen, infact it doesn’t include any personal opinion at all.

    Personally, I think he WILL win, because of his skin colour. I think he will have braoder appeal and encourage black voters.

    However, I also think it’s a shame that it has to even be mentioned. Clearly the man is black but will that really have ANY effect on how good a job he could do as Presiednt?

    Like

  30. As previous commenters have mentioned, simply stating that you think someone won’t win because of the colour of their skin isn’t being racist. Thats just commenting on what you think will happen, infact it doesn’t include any personal opinion at all.

    Personally, I think he WILL win, because of his skin colour. I think he will have braoder appeal and encourage black voters.

    However, I also think it’s a shame that it has to even be mentioned. Clearly the man is black but will that really have ANY effect on how good a job he could do as Presiednt?

    Like

  31. I think you guys have your arguments applied like strings following the wrong proc. Call whichever variable you want, and apply the right algorithm. Your present code won’t run; it’s crashing. That’s why no sense can be made between the rhetoric and the logic. Fuzzy logic never did apply to variables. If person “A” supplies Answer “B” when Person “B” asks Question “A”, what does that have to do with race, color, creed, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, handicap, party affiliation, or anything else?
    The conversation HAS been started; but, the technical protocols aren’t being followed. Nice work, Robert, of eliciting the “meat-bots” reactions.

    Like

  32. I think you guys have your arguments applied like strings following the wrong proc. Call whichever variable you want, and apply the right algorithm. Your present code won’t run; it’s crashing. That’s why no sense can be made between the rhetoric and the logic. Fuzzy logic never did apply to variables. If person “A” supplies Answer “B” when Person “B” asks Question “A”, what does that have to do with race, color, creed, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, handicap, party affiliation, or anything else?
    The conversation HAS been started; but, the technical protocols aren’t being followed. Nice work, Robert, of eliciting the “meat-bots” reactions.

    Like

  33. I agree 100% with you. In Austria, we call this “day-to-day racism”, and it’s a very very bad thing, because most people think it’s OK.
    In reality, it’s a danger for our societies.

    But the commenters are right: It’s not so easy for many people to publicly disagree on that sentence, especially since a lot of people have a great respect for you.
    But you’re right with that day-to-day racism is something to be hated. 😉

    Like

  34. I agree 100% with you. In Austria, we call this “day-to-day racism”, and it’s a very very bad thing, because most people think it’s OK.
    In reality, it’s a danger for our societies.

    But the commenters are right: It’s not so easy for many people to publicly disagree on that sentence, especially since a lot of people have a great respect for you.
    But you’re right with that day-to-day racism is something to be hated. 😉

    Like

  35. The cable news networks and the news magazines have been speaking about this quite frankly. Usually what’s said boils down to either:

    – “Americans are more prepared for a Black president than a woman president”; or

    – “Sure one of them could get nominated, but can they win the general election? People might be too embarrassed to tell a pollster they wouldn’t vote for an AA or a woman, but once they get in the booth the truth comes out.”

    But I heard a different take on this just last night that rang true to me. (Might have been on Hardball? Not sure.) A pundit said people will vote for Obama to make themselves feel virtuous.

    Like

  36. The cable news networks and the news magazines have been speaking about this quite frankly. Usually what’s said boils down to either:

    – “Americans are more prepared for a Black president than a woman president”; or

    – “Sure one of them could get nominated, but can they win the general election? People might be too embarrassed to tell a pollster they wouldn’t vote for an AA or a woman, but once they get in the booth the truth comes out.”

    But I heard a different take on this just last night that rang true to me. (Might have been on Hardball? Not sure.) A pundit said people will vote for Obama to make themselves feel virtuous.

    Like

  37. It’s deeply, deeply disturbing that the colour of his skin is even an issue…voting rights have not truly been won if you can’t be the person who gets voted for. That’s not a democracy.
    I’ve also read some of the bigoted nonsense that is being raised about his middle name – that’s just sick.
    I’m glad that you’re raising this issue though…prejudices can persist for a long time even among reasonable and well-meaning people if they are never examined (it’s amazing what vileness gets excused as what “everybody knows”). People can accept appalling ideas if they never think about them.

    Like

  38. It’s deeply, deeply disturbing that the colour of his skin is even an issue…voting rights have not truly been won if you can’t be the person who gets voted for. That’s not a democracy.
    I’ve also read some of the bigoted nonsense that is being raised about his middle name – that’s just sick.
    I’m glad that you’re raising this issue though…prejudices can persist for a long time even among reasonable and well-meaning people if they are never examined (it’s amazing what vileness gets excused as what “everybody knows”). People can accept appalling ideas if they never think about them.

    Like

  39. I have heard some people say they think race may hurt Obama. I hear a lot of others say it might help him. (is that also racism?) But a lot of people I talk to don’t think it will be a serious factor compared to his positions on the issues. Of course I talk to a lot of Republicans for one thing. And for another I live near Massachusetts where race seemed to lagely be a none issue in the recent election. As was gender BTW. There wasn’t much of don’t vote for them because they are a woman or a minority. In my travels I see more racism in California than I do in most of the rest of the country.

    Like

  40. I have heard some people say they think race may hurt Obama. I hear a lot of others say it might help him. (is that also racism?) But a lot of people I talk to don’t think it will be a serious factor compared to his positions on the issues. Of course I talk to a lot of Republicans for one thing. And for another I live near Massachusetts where race seemed to lagely be a none issue in the recent election. As was gender BTW. There wasn’t much of don’t vote for them because they are a woman or a minority. In my travels I see more racism in California than I do in most of the rest of the country.

    Like

  41. Wow, I salute you Robert on courage to take on these issue and sadly I agree with you that Obama has no chances due to racism of people. Maybe you could ask Obama for video interview before elections, Robert?

    Like

  42. Wow, I salute you Robert on courage to take on these issue and sadly I agree with you that Obama has no chances due to racism of people. Maybe you could ask Obama for video interview before elections, Robert?

    Like

  43. I am one of the 100. I had a BIG DISCUSSION about this today with my daughter in the Bay Area, who thought Obama could win. In Arizona, with a 1% black population, I don’t see it.
    These are perspectives. They don’t necessarily imply that I am a racist, but they acknowledge the reality that much of America is not only still racist right now but xenophobic.

    Nevertheless, I publicly acknowledge that I WANT HIM TO WIN.

    And I think that not talking to bloggers yet, when you have announced by putting video online direct-to-viewers, might be more authentic. Bloggers, after all, are also intermediaries 🙂

    Like

  44. I am one of the 100. I had a BIG DISCUSSION about this today with my daughter in the Bay Area, who thought Obama could win. In Arizona, with a 1% black population, I don’t see it.
    These are perspectives. They don’t necessarily imply that I am a racist, but they acknowledge the reality that much of America is not only still racist right now but xenophobic.

    Nevertheless, I publicly acknowledge that I WANT HIM TO WIN.

    And I think that not talking to bloggers yet, when you have announced by putting video online direct-to-viewers, might be more authentic. Bloggers, after all, are also intermediaries 🙂

    Like

  45. I feel that Obama’s race will really be a non-factor in the election because America is finally becoming less racist – but obviously not enough because people still do hold onto that “default reacism”. I would almost say that the “default” racism is the remnants of the racism that has occured in past decades and is just getting to the point where it is something that people don’t talk about or affirm in public, but they still won’t deny it exists.

    What I would be more concerned about is Obama’s religion. If he does become a serious contender in the Presidential race, I’m hoping the truth will come out about the rumors that he was raised by radical Muslims. If he was… I don’t think I’d ever be comfortable with him as President.

    Like

  46. I feel that Obama’s race will really be a non-factor in the election because America is finally becoming less racist – but obviously not enough because people still do hold onto that “default reacism”. I would almost say that the “default” racism is the remnants of the racism that has occured in past decades and is just getting to the point where it is something that people don’t talk about or affirm in public, but they still won’t deny it exists.

    What I would be more concerned about is Obama’s religion. If he does become a serious contender in the Presidential race, I’m hoping the truth will come out about the rumors that he was raised by radical Muslims. If he was… I don’t think I’d ever be comfortable with him as President.

    Like

  47. Id sadly agree with “I think he isn’t going to get elected because of the color of his skin.”

    That’s a political judgment not racism.

    And given the structure of the US political system where the more un reconstructed states have more power than they should on a purely population level.

    I think Religion might have more of an issue here and also I doubt he can raise enough cash.

    I must push my friend (again) who’s the election agent for the local; MP to get the sitting MP’s site back up and to get a Blog going!

    As the constituency is one of the key swing ones and the opponent is an guy whose been a VC in the states for a long time (he has dual nationality). It will be interesting to see if the Opposition do Blogs/Web etc more in the American style or not – as David Cameron has.

    Like

  48. Id sadly agree with “I think he isn’t going to get elected because of the color of his skin.”

    That’s a political judgment not racism.

    And given the structure of the US political system where the more un reconstructed states have more power than they should on a purely population level.

    I think Religion might have more of an issue here and also I doubt he can raise enough cash.

    I must push my friend (again) who’s the election agent for the local; MP to get the sitting MP’s site back up and to get a Blog going!

    As the constituency is one of the key swing ones and the opponent is an guy whose been a VC in the states for a long time (he has dual nationality). It will be interesting to see if the Opposition do Blogs/Web etc more in the American style or not – as David Cameron has.

    Like

  49. Robert – Your information gathering technique is invalid. I wonder how the people you talked to will react next time you approach them. If it were me, I’d walk away before you got to me. That said, I think you can have an opinion about electability without being labeled in negative terms. Also, I take the fact that you “haven’t seen the major political blogs, or Web sites, take on the issue of race and the 2008 candidacy” as a welcome sign of progress. Some contend it’s racist to bring it up at all.

    Like

  50. Robert – Your information gathering technique is invalid. I wonder how the people you talked to will react next time you approach them. If it were me, I’d walk away before you got to me. That said, I think you can have an opinion about electability without being labeled in negative terms. Also, I take the fact that you “haven’t seen the major political blogs, or Web sites, take on the issue of race and the 2008 candidacy” as a welcome sign of progress. Some contend it’s racist to bring it up at all.

    Like

  51. To shorten down what a lot of people have said, your question is like asking someone “so, have you stopped beating your wife yet?”

    It assumes a position on the behalf of the person you are speaking to. I’ll give you the simpler reason he won’t get elected – and it’s the same reason that I don’t think McCain or Clinton will, either.

    He’s a Senator, and Senators generally don’t get elected President. In fact, there are only two cases in US history where anyone has gone straight from the Senate to the White House – and I’d bet good money that none of the people I mentioned will be the third.

    If Obama wants to be President, the road runs through the Governor’s Mansion, not through the Senate.

    Like

  52. Anyone who thinks that racism in America is fading away has not lived in a former slave state, is not a person of color, or has not spent enough time around people of color to see that is not the case. Let’s not forget that we just saw the burning of some predominantly black churches in North Carolina less than a week ago. Yes racism is a huge problem in America and I have no doubt that Obama’s race will be an obstacle for him on the road to getting elected. I do not, however, think that it will be as big an obstacle for him as it had been for people of color, women, and non-protestants who have run for office before him. If he runs, regardless of his success, he will make it that much easier for people of color who decide to run after him as well.

    By stating that you think Obama’s race will hinder him moving toward the election and having people agree with you – I don’t think that’s any kind of default racism at all. As a person of color (biracial at that) I would’ve agreed with you too. However bleak that opinion may be, it is realistic.

    Like

  53. Anyone who thinks that racism in America is fading away has not lived in a former slave state, is not a person of color, or has not spent enough time around people of color to see that is not the case. Let’s not forget that we just saw the burning of some predominantly black churches in North Carolina less than a week ago. Yes racism is a huge problem in America and I have no doubt that Obama’s race will be an obstacle for him on the road to getting elected. I do not, however, think that it will be as big an obstacle for him as it had been for people of color, women, and non-protestants who have run for office before him. If he runs, regardless of his success, he will make it that much easier for people of color who decide to run after him as well.

    By stating that you think Obama’s race will hinder him moving toward the election and having people agree with you – I don’t think that’s any kind of default racism at all. As a person of color (biracial at that) I would’ve agreed with you too. However bleak that opinion may be, it is realistic.

    Like

  54. To shorten down what a lot of people have said, your question is like asking someone “so, have you stopped beating your wife yet?”

    It assumes a position on the behalf of the person you are speaking to. I’ll give you the simpler reason he won’t get elected – and it’s the same reason that I don’t think McCain or Clinton will, either.

    He’s a Senator, and Senators generally don’t get elected President. In fact, there are only two cases in US history where anyone has gone straight from the Senate to the White House – and I’d bet good money that none of the people I mentioned will be the third.

    If Obama wants to be President, the road runs through the Governor’s Mansion, not through the Senate.

    Like

  55. While I would argue he doesn’t have the experience I think he will get a lot of votes based soley on the color of his skin.
    First of all he will get the black caucus vote because he’s well black. Second, he’s a “feel good” candidate. People can “feel good” voting for a person of African American background because they are striking a blow for racism everywhere.
    Like James Robertson posted, if he was a governor or had other experience besides being a freshman Senator then I would think he would have enough experience.

    Like

  56. While I would argue he doesn’t have the experience I think he will get a lot of votes based soley on the color of his skin.
    First of all he will get the black caucus vote because he’s well black. Second, he’s a “feel good” candidate. People can “feel good” voting for a person of African American background because they are striking a blow for racism everywhere.
    Like James Robertson posted, if he was a governor or had other experience besides being a freshman Senator then I would think he would have enough experience.

    Like

  57. What follows my statement is what really pisses me off: I haven’t had many people disagree with me. Admittedly small sample size, but now more than 100 people.

    Are you saying this in a personal opinion or making a statement of fact? Could be that people are agreeing with you in a general way (same as if you were saying ‘ a divorced man cannot get elected president’) or .. maybe they’re just being polite.

    Or perhaps they’re going .. well DAMN I didn’t know Scoble was a racist but they’re not saying that to your face … (smile).

    Like

  58. What follows my statement is what really pisses me off: I haven’t had many people disagree with me. Admittedly small sample size, but now more than 100 people.

    Are you saying this in a personal opinion or making a statement of fact? Could be that people are agreeing with you in a general way (same as if you were saying ‘ a divorced man cannot get elected president’) or .. maybe they’re just being polite.

    Or perhaps they’re going .. well DAMN I didn’t know Scoble was a racist but they’re not saying that to your face … (smile).

    Like

  59. Scobble,

    Their are several ways to understand your statement:

    1. People tend to assume they view is the default one (what psychologist call the “ego-bias”, and it is significantly stronger in the USA then in other western society); saying “I’m no racist but he has no chance” could be interpreted as a revealing mechanism — and shows racism indeed.

    2. People acknowledge that a share of voter are racists: you can blame them to face that without a urge to change it — and it’s a milder form of racism, that can be justified by a very broad definition of “Freedom of Speech”: “I disagree with you, but I will fight to death to allow you to say it” famously said Voltaire. Some countries have laws against that; it is illegal not only to suport, but also to consider Nazism acceptable as a political doctrine in France, and I think Germany, but not USA I believe.

    3. You can reckon many people understand why such a statement “make somehow sense” (Black people historically were given less responsibility) — unlike: “American will never vote for a President with a name starting by vowel.” that would puzzle anyone. However void for anyone, this issue still stand: it’s a mechanism first described by Thomas C. Shelling (Nobel prize in Economics 2005). It explains very well financial bubbles: no one thinks such equity can be actually worth that much, but people agree that they can buy it anyway, as someone (with the same reasoning) will buy it at an even higher price.

    A similar issue plays in current presidential race in France, but against historic prejudice: the socialist candidate might be elected, and, though few consider her being a woman is a relevant issue, they anticipate this to influence votes towards her. Why? No real reason, but as people prefer to support the winner, it will probably have a significant impact in her favor.

    The odd part is that Obama wouldn’t be considered black, here — but that is another issue.

    Like

  60. Scobble,

    Their are several ways to understand your statement:

    1. People tend to assume they view is the default one (what psychologist call the “ego-bias”, and it is significantly stronger in the USA then in other western society); saying “I’m no racist but he has no chance” could be interpreted as a revealing mechanism — and shows racism indeed.

    2. People acknowledge that a share of voter are racists: you can blame them to face that without a urge to change it — and it’s a milder form of racism, that can be justified by a very broad definition of “Freedom of Speech”: “I disagree with you, but I will fight to death to allow you to say it” famously said Voltaire. Some countries have laws against that; it is illegal not only to suport, but also to consider Nazism acceptable as a political doctrine in France, and I think Germany, but not USA I believe.

    3. You can reckon many people understand why such a statement “make somehow sense” (Black people historically were given less responsibility) — unlike: “American will never vote for a President with a name starting by vowel.” that would puzzle anyone. However void for anyone, this issue still stand: it’s a mechanism first described by Thomas C. Shelling (Nobel prize in Economics 2005). It explains very well financial bubbles: no one thinks such equity can be actually worth that much, but people agree that they can buy it anyway, as someone (with the same reasoning) will buy it at an even higher price.

    A similar issue plays in current presidential race in France, but against historic prejudice: the socialist candidate might be elected, and, though few consider her being a woman is a relevant issue, they anticipate this to influence votes towards her. Why? No real reason, but as people prefer to support the winner, it will probably have a significant impact in her favor.

    The odd part is that Obama wouldn’t be considered black, here — but that is another issue.

    Like

  61. I’ll take it a step further.

    I don’t think Hillary has a chance, because she’s a woman.

    I don’t think the general US population is “ready” for a woman or minority president. Personally? I’d welcome the change with either.

    The US has traditionally been very slow to adopt to the idea of change. People still can’t get over the idea that the speaker of the house is a woman. THAT was a headliner, and in a way controversial. Meanwhile, 98% of Americans couldn’t name the last 3 or 4 to hold that position (because we don’t care).

    I sincerely hope I’m wrong, but I think we are still a while away.

    Regardless, a serious run by them is still a giant step forward. You can’t win if your not even in the race. I think that’s the big thing to keep in mind here.

    Like

  62. I’ll take it a step further.

    I don’t think Hillary has a chance, because she’s a woman.

    I don’t think the general US population is “ready” for a woman or minority president. Personally? I’d welcome the change with either.

    The US has traditionally been very slow to adopt to the idea of change. People still can’t get over the idea that the speaker of the house is a woman. THAT was a headliner, and in a way controversial. Meanwhile, 98% of Americans couldn’t name the last 3 or 4 to hold that position (because we don’t care).

    I sincerely hope I’m wrong, but I think we are still a while away.

    Regardless, a serious run by them is still a giant step forward. You can’t win if your not even in the race. I think that’s the big thing to keep in mind here.

    Like

  63. The only racist particle of your statement is in the inherent assumption that white people won’t vote for him because he’s black. This is meta-racism; as Bertil mentions, people acknowledge that a share of voters are racist – and that assumed racism is ironically placed along racial lines.

    It’s more racist to mention that Obama has a better chance of winning swing states with large black populations – you’re presuming black people will blindly vote for him because he’s black.

    The problem with calling any of these observations racism, is that they are likely to be testable political hypotheses. It’s not racism to state a fact like “64 percent of polled black voters said they were more likely to vote for a black candidate for president.*”
    (* I made that up)

    I believe it’s widely understood in the American political system that the race of a candidate is a factor in many elections, and someone disagreeing or agreeing with your proposition is merely expressing their opinion on the weight of this factor in the electorate.

    Now if you had said “Obama shouldn’t be President because” …

    Like

  64. The only racist particle of your statement is in the inherent assumption that white people won’t vote for him because he’s black. This is meta-racism; as Bertil mentions, people acknowledge that a share of voters are racist – and that assumed racism is ironically placed along racial lines.

    It’s more racist to mention that Obama has a better chance of winning swing states with large black populations – you’re presuming black people will blindly vote for him because he’s black.

    The problem with calling any of these observations racism, is that they are likely to be testable political hypotheses. It’s not racism to state a fact like “64 percent of polled black voters said they were more likely to vote for a black candidate for president.*”
    (* I made that up)

    I believe it’s widely understood in the American political system that the race of a candidate is a factor in many elections, and someone disagreeing or agreeing with your proposition is merely expressing their opinion on the weight of this factor in the electorate.

    Now if you had said “Obama shouldn’t be President because” …

    Like

  65. Yeah Robert, but a great number of voters are just plain idiots.

    In the past, I’ve had numerous people tell me that they really wanted to vote for [candidate name] but that they didn’t want to “waste” their vote. Meaning, they didn’t want to vote for some underdog, because they wouldn’t win, and they wanted to vote for the winning candidate (Makes no sense to me).

    I usually just tell them to stay home during the next election process.

    Or also, some people have told me that they vote purely on how the candidate “looks” without paying ANY attention to what the policies of the candidate are. My own mother voted for Bill Clinton because of looks (what she see’s, I haven’t a clue, but I’ve heard that same thing frmo many women. Maybe they like cigars?)

    So, yeah, it’s not a perfect system because it involves humans, and our less-than-perfect decision making process(es).

    Regardless of skin color, Obama doesn’t have enough experience – maybe that is what this country needs? I don’t know.

    I’ll certainly be leaning towards voting for whoever DOESN’T try to put it as the Democrats against the Republicans, or the rich against the poor.

    Those are NOT issues, those are simply political tactics.

    Like

  66. Yeah Robert, but a great number of voters are just plain idiots.

    In the past, I’ve had numerous people tell me that they really wanted to vote for [candidate name] but that they didn’t want to “waste” their vote. Meaning, they didn’t want to vote for some underdog, because they wouldn’t win, and they wanted to vote for the winning candidate (Makes no sense to me).

    I usually just tell them to stay home during the next election process.

    Or also, some people have told me that they vote purely on how the candidate “looks” without paying ANY attention to what the policies of the candidate are. My own mother voted for Bill Clinton because of looks (what she see’s, I haven’t a clue, but I’ve heard that same thing frmo many women. Maybe they like cigars?)

    So, yeah, it’s not a perfect system because it involves humans, and our less-than-perfect decision making process(es).

    Regardless of skin color, Obama doesn’t have enough experience – maybe that is what this country needs? I don’t know.

    I’ll certainly be leaning towards voting for whoever DOESN’T try to put it as the Democrats against the Republicans, or the rich against the poor.

    Those are NOT issues, those are simply political tactics.

    Like

  67. Robert: “I think he isn’t going to get elected because of the color of his skin.”

    Herschel: Well, to tell you the truth Robert, you might be right. Although the Civil Rights Act passed more than 25 years ago and slaves were freed in the US over 140 years ago, racism continues to exist in the United States against all people of color.

    Although our generation was the first integrated generation, many in our parents and grand parents generations hold on to the old ways and old ideas.

    Robert: “If someone says something racist to you, and you don’t disagree, aren’t you also racist by default?

    Herschel: I would hope not. In this case Robert, you have stated something that might be true. Obama may not be able to get elected because he is half African American. But in general if I choose not to debate every racist I come by that doesn’t make me a racist by default.

    Robert: “It’s also interesting that I haven’t seen the major political blogs, or Web sites, take on the issue of race and the 2008 candidacy.”

    Herschel: Robert, have you really let go of the old ways? Do you overly look for the “default” in people? Yes, the default is sick and it is out there. But maybe we have actually made more progress on this issue than you really think. Maybe the reason you haven’t seen “race” as an issue so far is because it might not be an issue. Maybe enough people realize that the color of a person’s skin has no bearing on the ability of that person. In the span of mtr life we now have seen a woman become Speaker of the House, a BLACK WOMAN become Secretary of State and a WOMAN in serious contention for the nomination of the Democratic Party in 2006? This is real progress.

    Like

  68. Robert: “I think he isn’t going to get elected because of the color of his skin.”

    Herschel: Well, to tell you the truth Robert, you might be right. Although the Civil Rights Act passed more than 25 years ago and slaves were freed in the US over 140 years ago, racism continues to exist in the United States against all people of color.

    Although our generation was the first integrated generation, many in our parents and grand parents generations hold on to the old ways and old ideas.

    Robert: “If someone says something racist to you, and you don’t disagree, aren’t you also racist by default?

    Herschel: I would hope not. In this case Robert, you have stated something that might be true. Obama may not be able to get elected because he is half African American. But in general if I choose not to debate every racist I come by that doesn’t make me a racist by default.

    Robert: “It’s also interesting that I haven’t seen the major political blogs, or Web sites, take on the issue of race and the 2008 candidacy.”

    Herschel: Robert, have you really let go of the old ways? Do you overly look for the “default” in people? Yes, the default is sick and it is out there. But maybe we have actually made more progress on this issue than you really think. Maybe the reason you haven’t seen “race” as an issue so far is because it might not be an issue. Maybe enough people realize that the color of a person’s skin has no bearing on the ability of that person. In the span of mtr life we now have seen a woman become Speaker of the House, a BLACK WOMAN become Secretary of State and a WOMAN in serious contention for the nomination of the Democratic Party in 2006? This is real progress.

    Like

  69. This has probably men mentioned in the comments, but i don’t think it automatically implies racism to agree with that comment, or even to suggest it yourself. Making that statement implies nothing about your own personal racist (or non-racist) feelings, but simply that you think him being black/half-black/part-black/anything-other-than-white makes him less electable over the whole country. By stating how you think the country as a whole will vote (or agreeing with someone who states something like that), for whatever reason, doesn’t make you a racist.

    On another note – I’d like to see an Edwards/Obama ticket. Whichever one of them makes it through the primaries should ask the other to be a running mate. I think maybe Edwards would be more prepared to go for President (is it racist to say Edwards is “more electable”?) in 2008 with Obama as VP, then that would set up Obama for a strong run for Pres in 2016 (long term planning!!)

    Like

  70. This has probably men mentioned in the comments, but i don’t think it automatically implies racism to agree with that comment, or even to suggest it yourself. Making that statement implies nothing about your own personal racist (or non-racist) feelings, but simply that you think him being black/half-black/part-black/anything-other-than-white makes him less electable over the whole country. By stating how you think the country as a whole will vote (or agreeing with someone who states something like that), for whatever reason, doesn’t make you a racist.

    On another note – I’d like to see an Edwards/Obama ticket. Whichever one of them makes it through the primaries should ask the other to be a running mate. I think maybe Edwards would be more prepared to go for President (is it racist to say Edwards is “more electable”?) in 2008 with Obama as VP, then that would set up Obama for a strong run for Pres in 2016 (long term planning!!)

    Like

  71. another day, another couple of political posts. technology not good enough any more? its sure as hell more INTERESTING.

    Like

  72. another day, another couple of political posts. technology not good enough any more? its sure as hell more INTERESTING.

    Like

  73. Maybe this is off topic, but why is he considered an African-American? One parent was African-American, one was white anglo….

    In which way are we being racist? Because he’s “sorta African-American” or “sorta white”?

    Like

  74. Maybe this is off topic, but why is he considered an African-American? One parent was African-American, one was white anglo….

    In which way are we being racist? Because he’s “sorta African-American” or “sorta white”?

    Like

  75. You are right that many people are guilty of projecting their own prejudices on “those red state people.” However, Obama has a better chance of winning than those people might think. He doesn’t have to win over Republicans to get the Democratic nomination, and he may not have to win over too many of them even to win the whole thing. He is the most charismatic Democrat since Bill Clinton, and maybe that will be enough to win the nomination of his party. Plus he’s not tainted by Iraq like both Edwards and Hilly Clinton are. If wins the nomination, he may be able to swing some formerly red states with increased minority turnout, not by appealing to anybody that votes Republican.

    Like

  76. You are right that many people are guilty of projecting their own prejudices on “those red state people.” However, Obama has a better chance of winning than those people might think. He doesn’t have to win over Republicans to get the Democratic nomination, and he may not have to win over too many of them even to win the whole thing. He is the most charismatic Democrat since Bill Clinton, and maybe that will be enough to win the nomination of his party. Plus he’s not tainted by Iraq like both Edwards and Hilly Clinton are. If wins the nomination, he may be able to swing some formerly red states with increased minority turnout, not by appealing to anybody that votes Republican.

    Like

  77. Us “hicks” in Tennessee were accused of racism because we didn’t elect Harold Ford, Jr. I didn’t vote for Ford, and I won’t vote for Obama. I don’t care if they’re white, purple, or polka dotted.

    To me, the phrase “default” racism denotes the automatic response of “I didn’t get what I want, so it must be because of the color of my skin.” How can we ever “judge a person by the content of his character” when that person can’t get past using the color of his own skin as an excuse for his failures?

    Like

  78. Us “hicks” in Tennessee were accused of racism because we didn’t elect Harold Ford, Jr. I didn’t vote for Ford, and I won’t vote for Obama. I don’t care if they’re white, purple, or polka dotted.

    To me, the phrase “default” racism denotes the automatic response of “I didn’t get what I want, so it must be because of the color of my skin.” How can we ever “judge a person by the content of his character” when that person can’t get past using the color of his own skin as an excuse for his failures?

    Like

  79. If I were to say: I’m more likely to win a basketball game against short people than tall people, does that make me “heightist”?

    Nope, just a statement of what is a likely outcome based on my internal model of the world. Like it or not, race will play a role in how many people vote, and to acknowledge that is to acknowledge your understanding of the world, not necessarily whether it is right or wrong.

    Like

  80. If I were to say: I’m more likely to win a basketball game against short people than tall people, does that make me “heightist”?

    Nope, just a statement of what is a likely outcome based on my internal model of the world. Like it or not, race will play a role in how many people vote, and to acknowledge that is to acknowledge your understanding of the world, not necessarily whether it is right or wrong.

    Like

  81. You know, I’ve mostly grown up and lived in the South, so I’ve dealt with my share of racist folks.

    But honestly, I don’t know that your statement screams racism. It screams sadness, because it may well be a reality for a decent sized chunk of the population.

    If I were sitting in front of you, and presumably knew you and respected you, and you said something like that to me, I’d probably shake my head and say something like, “You may be right, but I sure as hell hope not.”

    Not sure where these folks you’ve been talking to are from, but if I didn’t know you well, I might choose to gloss over your statement not because I believed it to be racist or because I’m racist, but because I would feel embarrassed for you and I wouldn’t want to pursue it unless you did. If you did, I’d admit that while I know plenty of people who wouldn’t give his race a thought, I, sadly, know more who would.

    I live in Tennessee, and the otherwise mostly decent folks of my state overwhelmingly voted to “protect” marriage by ammending the constitution to make it illegal for gay folks to marry here, even though there was already a law against it. I’ve had conversations with people I love and respect who are just plain wrong on that issue, but they don’t see it. Somehow we’re at a point where older folks in the South can look back and see and admit we’ve been wrong on race but they don’t draw a parallel between that and sexual orientation. That actually makes me more sad, but maybe that’s because I’ve seen those folks “grow up” on race and am disappointed they haven’t yet on this issue.

    Rambling, sorry.

    Like

  82. You know, I’ve mostly grown up and lived in the South, so I’ve dealt with my share of racist folks.

    But honestly, I don’t know that your statement screams racism. It screams sadness, because it may well be a reality for a decent sized chunk of the population.

    If I were sitting in front of you, and presumably knew you and respected you, and you said something like that to me, I’d probably shake my head and say something like, “You may be right, but I sure as hell hope not.”

    Not sure where these folks you’ve been talking to are from, but if I didn’t know you well, I might choose to gloss over your statement not because I believed it to be racist or because I’m racist, but because I would feel embarrassed for you and I wouldn’t want to pursue it unless you did. If you did, I’d admit that while I know plenty of people who wouldn’t give his race a thought, I, sadly, know more who would.

    I live in Tennessee, and the otherwise mostly decent folks of my state overwhelmingly voted to “protect” marriage by ammending the constitution to make it illegal for gay folks to marry here, even though there was already a law against it. I’ve had conversations with people I love and respect who are just plain wrong on that issue, but they don’t see it. Somehow we’re at a point where older folks in the South can look back and see and admit we’ve been wrong on race but they don’t draw a parallel between that and sexual orientation. That actually makes me more sad, but maybe that’s because I’ve seen those folks “grow up” on race and am disappointed they haven’t yet on this issue.

    Rambling, sorry.

    Like

  83. You know, Robert, it takes real courage to confront a racist. Most people aren’t racists but they don’t necessarily want to get into a public confrontation with a racist either.

    What really pisses me off are people like you that throw out inflammatory statements that they don’t believe in the interest of furthering their own selfish desires (in this case a flawed sociology experiment).

    Like

  84. You know, Robert, it takes real courage to confront a racist. Most people aren’t racists but they don’t necessarily want to get into a public confrontation with a racist either.

    What really pisses me off are people like you that throw out inflammatory statements that they don’t believe in the interest of furthering their own selfish desires (in this case a flawed sociology experiment).

    Like

  85. If I say “I think the majority of American voters are racist.” Is that racist? Because that is essentially equivalent to “I don’t think Obama will be elected due to the color of his skin.”

    Like

  86. If I say “I think the majority of American voters are racist.” Is that racist? Because that is essentially equivalent to “I don’t think Obama will be elected due to the color of his skin.”

    Like

  87. I think Gideon summed it up pretty well:

    “Because a huge part of this country is still staggaringly backward and has all sorts of ‘passive racism.’ I don’t know much about you or where you come from, Robert, but I’ve spent the vast majority of my life in the midwest – and it’s still pretty bad here in ‘red state land.’”

    Robert, most “liberal enclaves” – whether you’re thinking of SF, LA, NYC, or DC – are echo chambers where they assume that the rest of the country is backwards and racist. Luckily, make out decisions about people based on their values and actions as opposed to their geography.

    ~ Born and raised outside Chicago, college in Indiana, living and working in DC.

    Like

  88. I think Gideon summed it up pretty well:

    “Because a huge part of this country is still staggaringly backward and has all sorts of ‘passive racism.’ I don’t know much about you or where you come from, Robert, but I’ve spent the vast majority of my life in the midwest – and it’s still pretty bad here in ‘red state land.’”

    Robert, most “liberal enclaves” – whether you’re thinking of SF, LA, NYC, or DC – are echo chambers where they assume that the rest of the country is backwards and racist. Luckily, make out decisions about people based on their values and actions as opposed to their geography.

    ~ Born and raised outside Chicago, college in Indiana, living and working in DC.

    Like

  89. Mr. Scoble, sorry your blog’s taking a turn off of technology for a while 🙂 Good for conversation though.

    If we were all blind and could only hear, smell and touch one another (let’s leave out taste for now, ok?)… we’d still find characteristics that distinguished or seperated one another. It’s just gonna happen. Does that make us profilers or racists? By in large, no. Could it come across that way? Absolutely.

    Now, how many people will identify or find affinity with an Obama, McCain, Clinton, Giuliani… is anyone’s guess. It really is “popular” appeal not largely based enough on ability and more on salesmanship. And whoever can transcend the objections (be they physical attributes or position statemens or consistency)… well, only time will tell. Wouldn’t it be nice if everything political was a meritocracy? Where the most able to lead… DID!

    Like

  90. Mr. Scoble, sorry your blog’s taking a turn off of technology for a while 🙂 Good for conversation though.

    If we were all blind and could only hear, smell and touch one another (let’s leave out taste for now, ok?)… we’d still find characteristics that distinguished or seperated one another. It’s just gonna happen. Does that make us profilers or racists? By in large, no. Could it come across that way? Absolutely.

    Now, how many people will identify or find affinity with an Obama, McCain, Clinton, Giuliani… is anyone’s guess. It really is “popular” appeal not largely based enough on ability and more on salesmanship. And whoever can transcend the objections (be they physical attributes or position statemens or consistency)… well, only time will tell. Wouldn’t it be nice if everything political was a meritocracy? Where the most able to lead… DID!

    Like

  91. I think it really depends on what people think of the question. Saying “I think he isn’t going to get elected because of the color of his skin.” can be taken several ways, depending on how the question is perceived. Some people might have interpreted that statement in and of itself as a racist comment, and declined to say anything because they were surprised to hear someone say something like that.

    Personally, I think people are in love with the idea of Obama. They have no idea what he stands for, he hasn’t sited any of the things he’s “bridged” in his relatively short career (even thought he’s found of using that word), and the media really haven’t dug into his overall story yet.

    As far as the other candidates, they need to demonstrate how what they’re saying really matches what they’re living. That’s what bugs me about Edwards right now. He keeps talking about “two Americas”… He’s never lived that in his life as a lawyer. I haven’t seen him sponsor anything since his run with Kerry, at least nothing that would help heal the “two Americas”. No, it’s in his best interest to make sure there continue to be “two Americas”. Frankly, that’s what I consider quiet racism.

    Like

  92. I think it really depends on what people think of the question. Saying “I think he isn’t going to get elected because of the color of his skin.” can be taken several ways, depending on how the question is perceived. Some people might have interpreted that statement in and of itself as a racist comment, and declined to say anything because they were surprised to hear someone say something like that.

    Personally, I think people are in love with the idea of Obama. They have no idea what he stands for, he hasn’t sited any of the things he’s “bridged” in his relatively short career (even thought he’s found of using that word), and the media really haven’t dug into his overall story yet.

    As far as the other candidates, they need to demonstrate how what they’re saying really matches what they’re living. That’s what bugs me about Edwards right now. He keeps talking about “two Americas”… He’s never lived that in his life as a lawyer. I haven’t seen him sponsor anything since his run with Kerry, at least nothing that would help heal the “two Americas”. No, it’s in his best interest to make sure there continue to be “two Americas”. Frankly, that’s what I consider quiet racism.

    Like

  93. The way you phrase the statement, their lack of disagreement doesn’t reflect racism, but their acknowledgment that racism still exists on some level. What you said wasn’t racist, so they see no need to defend it. Actually, there are plenty of people who would label you racist if you tried to argue with that statement! If you say that racism wouldn’t play a part in a black person’s chances of election, you can be perceived as being dismissive of racism. Stupid, but it happens.

    And thus, for the people talking to you, it’s a game of exaggeration and superiority. They inflate the effects of racism in order to sound sympathetic to those affected and superior to the ones perpetrating it. They’re creating three things: victims, bad guys, and good guys.

    There is a “Curb Your Enthusiasm” segment where Larry David talks about “white liberal nodding guilt.” David says he feels compelled to nod at black people as he passes them to silently tell them “hey, sorry about those other people, I’m not one of them.” Same thing here.

    And frankly, while racism does exist at varying levels in this country, the main colors that will hurt Obama are green and blue. In fact, the same colors hurt Clinton and Edwards. They’re all too far to the left to be mainstream candidates, and they are all (or were) Senators, so they don’t have the executive experience usually demanded of a President.

    Like

  94. The way you phrase the statement, their lack of disagreement doesn’t reflect racism, but their acknowledgment that racism still exists on some level. What you said wasn’t racist, so they see no need to defend it. Actually, there are plenty of people who would label you racist if you tried to argue with that statement! If you say that racism wouldn’t play a part in a black person’s chances of election, you can be perceived as being dismissive of racism. Stupid, but it happens.

    And thus, for the people talking to you, it’s a game of exaggeration and superiority. They inflate the effects of racism in order to sound sympathetic to those affected and superior to the ones perpetrating it. They’re creating three things: victims, bad guys, and good guys.

    There is a “Curb Your Enthusiasm” segment where Larry David talks about “white liberal nodding guilt.” David says he feels compelled to nod at black people as he passes them to silently tell them “hey, sorry about those other people, I’m not one of them.” Same thing here.

    And frankly, while racism does exist at varying levels in this country, the main colors that will hurt Obama are green and blue. In fact, the same colors hurt Clinton and Edwards. They’re all too far to the left to be mainstream candidates, and they are all (or were) Senators, so they don’t have the executive experience usually demanded of a President.

    Like

  95. Okay, I understand and agree that racism is ridiculous and unbelievably rampant, even in today’s society. However, I completely disagree with your rhetorical question:

    “If someone says something racist to you, and you don’t disagree, aren’t you also racist by default?”

    Of course not! I can think of a lot of reasons someone might not disagree while being non-racist.

    For example, my girlfriend dreads confrontations. She will go out of her way to avoid arguments with people she cares about. If you were to make that statement to her she would completely disagree. 100%. But she would never say that to your face or call you on your “implied” racism because to do so would cause a confrontation. I would hear all about it later, but you would never hear a peep. Does her confrontational anxiety mean she’s now a racist? That would be an absurd conclusion to reach.

    Another example…let’s say you made that comment to an African-American politician who has a decidedly different point of view than you. What if he (or she…don’t want to imply sexism!) agreed with you and said that our current political and sociological climate isn’t conducive towards an African-American President getting elected? Is that implied racism or a subjective critique of the voting populace?

    I believe you are taking a narrow view of what others’ reactions or lack thereof means. You have seemingly made the decision that 100+ people are somewhat racist without allowing for other motives behind the lack of disagreement.

    Before you get all pissed off you should consider other reasons behind the “racism” you experienced.

    Like

  96. Okay, I understand and agree that racism is ridiculous and unbelievably rampant, even in today’s society. However, I completely disagree with your rhetorical question:

    “If someone says something racist to you, and you don’t disagree, aren’t you also racist by default?”

    Of course not! I can think of a lot of reasons someone might not disagree while being non-racist.

    For example, my girlfriend dreads confrontations. She will go out of her way to avoid arguments with people she cares about. If you were to make that statement to her she would completely disagree. 100%. But she would never say that to your face or call you on your “implied” racism because to do so would cause a confrontation. I would hear all about it later, but you would never hear a peep. Does her confrontational anxiety mean she’s now a racist? That would be an absurd conclusion to reach.

    Another example…let’s say you made that comment to an African-American politician who has a decidedly different point of view than you. What if he (or she…don’t want to imply sexism!) agreed with you and said that our current political and sociological climate isn’t conducive towards an African-American President getting elected? Is that implied racism or a subjective critique of the voting populace?

    I believe you are taking a narrow view of what others’ reactions or lack thereof means. You have seemingly made the decision that 100+ people are somewhat racist without allowing for other motives behind the lack of disagreement.

    Before you get all pissed off you should consider other reasons behind the “racism” you experienced.

    Like

  97. @24/Brian – Senator Obama is a Christian. You should read his book (Audacity of Hope); he talks extensively about his faith.

    @39/TWaters – Obama’s father was Kenyan, and his mother was a white American.

    I hope Barack Obama wins the nomination of the Democratic party, not because of his skin color, but because he is a breath of fresh air. He’s not tainted, he speaks openly and honestly, and seems to be a person who would give more than lip service to the idea of being a “uniter, not a divider.”

    Like

  98. @24/Brian – Senator Obama is a Christian. You should read his book (Audacity of Hope); he talks extensively about his faith.

    @39/TWaters – Obama’s father was Kenyan, and his mother was a white American.

    I hope Barack Obama wins the nomination of the Democratic party, not because of his skin color, but because he is a breath of fresh air. He’s not tainted, he speaks openly and honestly, and seems to be a person who would give more than lip service to the idea of being a “uniter, not a divider.”

    Like

  99. Enjoyed the read and social experiment. I can tell that the posting of the article elicited quite an array of responses from the comments.

    While one person can never speak for their race, I am Black, a tech geek, and a minority in opinion in many professional and social circumstances. 🙂

    Regardless of what is said, race is a pre-occupation of people just like celebrity gossip, sexual orientation, and income. The only difference is the historical and institutionalized branches tied to this hang-up. Barack is historical step in the direction of knocking that tree down.

    Like

  100. Enjoyed the read and social experiment. I can tell that the posting of the article elicited quite an array of responses from the comments.

    While one person can never speak for their race, I am Black, a tech geek, and a minority in opinion in many professional and social circumstances. 🙂

    Regardless of what is said, race is a pre-occupation of people just like celebrity gossip, sexual orientation, and income. The only difference is the historical and institutionalized branches tied to this hang-up. Barack is historical step in the direction of knocking that tree down.

    Like

  101. Well, this is your blog and you insist on going to political discussions. This one is doing a fine job of creating conversation.
    Here’s my 2 cents. I agree with John @36, we are all racist, as human beings we have a tendency to stick with what we know and like and shun what we do not know or dislike. We are always taking side on any issue:
    1. PC vs Apple
    2. Black vs white
    3. Politics vs technology
    4. Cats vs dogs

    This will not change as man is flawed. I believe that Barack has a reasonable chance for election because of his skin color, we are fed up with what we have now, and will take something different to get back into our comfort zone. Mrs Clinton has an issue with the baggage she brings.

    All in all, I understand the need to express and discuss issues of this magnitude, but I really enjoy it when you bring up crap about Apple and show how inferior it is to windows, (why would the business world use it and not Apple?)

    Racism is something that will become a part of this election, nothing will change that, the end result of the 2008 presidency will be decided by a bunch of different factors and will not end as anyone predicts.

    Guy

    It is nice to have a discussion and not have to stoop to name calling and ranting.

    Like

  102. Well, this is your blog and you insist on going to political discussions. This one is doing a fine job of creating conversation.
    Here’s my 2 cents. I agree with John @36, we are all racist, as human beings we have a tendency to stick with what we know and like and shun what we do not know or dislike. We are always taking side on any issue:
    1. PC vs Apple
    2. Black vs white
    3. Politics vs technology
    4. Cats vs dogs

    This will not change as man is flawed. I believe that Barack has a reasonable chance for election because of his skin color, we are fed up with what we have now, and will take something different to get back into our comfort zone. Mrs Clinton has an issue with the baggage she brings.

    All in all, I understand the need to express and discuss issues of this magnitude, but I really enjoy it when you bring up crap about Apple and show how inferior it is to windows, (why would the business world use it and not Apple?)

    Racism is something that will become a part of this election, nothing will change that, the end result of the 2008 presidency will be decided by a bunch of different factors and will not end as anyone predicts.

    Guy

    It is nice to have a discussion and not have to stoop to name calling and ranting.

    Like

  103. A person does not have to be a racist to think Barack’s skin color will affect how *others* will vote. If he’s the better candidate, I will be more than happy to vote for him. That does not mean everyone else thinks the same way. We all know racism still exists. Unfortunately, this will affect votes. The question is, will it make a big difference? I sure hope the answer to that one is a resounding, “No!” but it’s not up to me.

    The same goes with Hillary. I certainly don’t care that she’s a woman, but there are people who would think otherwise. It’s not right, but it’s true.

    Like

  104. A person does not have to be a racist to think Barack’s skin color will affect how *others* will vote. If he’s the better candidate, I will be more than happy to vote for him. That does not mean everyone else thinks the same way. We all know racism still exists. Unfortunately, this will affect votes. The question is, will it make a big difference? I sure hope the answer to that one is a resounding, “No!” but it’s not up to me.

    The same goes with Hillary. I certainly don’t care that she’s a woman, but there are people who would think otherwise. It’s not right, but it’s true.

    Like

  105. I think this is more race-consciousness than racism. The thing that happened in your neighborhood when you were a kid was racist. Your neighbor put enough stock in the potentially racist opinions of her neighbors to consider not selling her house to a black family.

    Race-consciousness is different. It’s problematic for its own reasons, but it’s not inherently deplorable. I don’t have any more of a problem with asking, “is Obama electable?” based on his race than I do with asking “is Hillary electable?” based on her gender.

    The real problem here is the overemphasis of electability. The Democrats focused on electability in 2004 an it got them John Kerry. They need to start focusing on a candidate who best embodies the platform they want to put forth as a party.

    Like

  106. I think this is more race-consciousness than racism. The thing that happened in your neighborhood when you were a kid was racist. Your neighbor put enough stock in the potentially racist opinions of her neighbors to consider not selling her house to a black family.

    Race-consciousness is different. It’s problematic for its own reasons, but it’s not inherently deplorable. I don’t have any more of a problem with asking, “is Obama electable?” based on his race than I do with asking “is Hillary electable?” based on her gender.

    The real problem here is the overemphasis of electability. The Democrats focused on electability in 2004 an it got them John Kerry. They need to start focusing on a candidate who best embodies the platform they want to put forth as a party.

    Like

  107. Agreement with that statement does not imply that the agreer (by silence or affirmation) is a racist. At worst you might assume your listener agrees there are enough racists here to make your statement a true one. Silence may also mean your listener thinks you are a racist and doesn’t quite know how to reply. If you were to say, instead “I’m not voting for Obama because of the color of his skin,” and your listener replied, “Me, neither.” Then your listener is likely a racist. Or a hypocrite.

    For the record, I disagree with your statement. You are wrong.

    Like

  108. Agreement with that statement does not imply that the agreer (by silence or affirmation) is a racist. At worst you might assume your listener agrees there are enough racists here to make your statement a true one. Silence may also mean your listener thinks you are a racist and doesn’t quite know how to reply. If you were to say, instead “I’m not voting for Obama because of the color of his skin,” and your listener replied, “Me, neither.” Then your listener is likely a racist. Or a hypocrite.

    For the record, I disagree with your statement. You are wrong.

    Like

  109. I would call it less default racism and more systemic racism. It is not so much that the individuals you questioned had racist tendencies, but they are acknowledging that American society has a systemic problem with racism. The systemic racism is propagated by both pockets of individuals who are racist, but also by the inequities that have never been addressed from the time of slavery and segregation.

    Does this mean that he won’t win? While I acknowledge the deep and systematic racism that is inherent in the US today, I do not think that this issue alone will decide the election. If you have had the opportunity to listen to Obama’s podcasts I think he has shown that he has the ability, intelligence and wherewithal to bring the political conversation with the American public beyond the issue of race. A prime example was how he addressed a similar issue (i.e., religion) that has shot countless Democrats in the foot over the past 8 years. Since Clinton’s presidency Republicans have laid claim to the title of being religious and moral. Liberals and democrats were often painted into a corner on this issue. During his senate campaign Barack effectively showed his constituents that you can be a Democrat and a good Christian. The two are not mutually exclusive as many Republicans would lead you to believe.
    I believe racism can be handled in much the same way; you can be black (or female for the same argument against systematic sexism) and be a good president. In the end I hope what the majority of Americans are looking for is a good president; one who respects the constitution, the rule of law, human rights, and one who trusts the American public enough to present the issues truthfully and in their entirety.

    As for one of the previous posts that he will lose because his middle name is Hussein. This should be an issue that Republican should be ashamed of. To call a person’s ability to lead into question over his name is the height of political laziness (and many other words I can’t share here). Have we lost the ability to raise our political discourse beyond the level of an individual’s race, sex, and personal predilections? Have we lost the ability to discuss issues on the basis of the merit and logic of the argument presented? I hope not. And that is why I hope Obama does win. He has provided both Democrats and Republicans a prime example of how to argue a position without passing judgment on the opposing side. You can disagree with a person’s point of view and yet still respect the person and their beliefs. It is only through these types of higher level conversations that our polarized nation can come together and address some of the pressing social, economic, and international policy issues that are facing us today.

    Like

  110. I would call it less default racism and more systemic racism. It is not so much that the individuals you questioned had racist tendencies, but they are acknowledging that American society has a systemic problem with racism. The systemic racism is propagated by both pockets of individuals who are racist, but also by the inequities that have never been addressed from the time of slavery and segregation.

    Does this mean that he won’t win? While I acknowledge the deep and systematic racism that is inherent in the US today, I do not think that this issue alone will decide the election. If you have had the opportunity to listen to Obama’s podcasts I think he has shown that he has the ability, intelligence and wherewithal to bring the political conversation with the American public beyond the issue of race. A prime example was how he addressed a similar issue (i.e., religion) that has shot countless Democrats in the foot over the past 8 years. Since Clinton’s presidency Republicans have laid claim to the title of being religious and moral. Liberals and democrats were often painted into a corner on this issue. During his senate campaign Barack effectively showed his constituents that you can be a Democrat and a good Christian. The two are not mutually exclusive as many Republicans would lead you to believe.
    I believe racism can be handled in much the same way; you can be black (or female for the same argument against systematic sexism) and be a good president. In the end I hope what the majority of Americans are looking for is a good president; one who respects the constitution, the rule of law, human rights, and one who trusts the American public enough to present the issues truthfully and in their entirety.

    As for one of the previous posts that he will lose because his middle name is Hussein. This should be an issue that Republican should be ashamed of. To call a person’s ability to lead into question over his name is the height of political laziness (and many other words I can’t share here). Have we lost the ability to raise our political discourse beyond the level of an individual’s race, sex, and personal predilections? Have we lost the ability to discuss issues on the basis of the merit and logic of the argument presented? I hope not. And that is why I hope Obama does win. He has provided both Democrats and Republicans a prime example of how to argue a position without passing judgment on the opposing side. You can disagree with a person’s point of view and yet still respect the person and their beliefs. It is only through these types of higher level conversations that our polarized nation can come together and address some of the pressing social, economic, and international policy issues that are facing us today.

    Like

  111. Careful with the grammer – these are two different sentences…

    “I think he isn’t going to get elected, because of the color of his skin.”
    “I think he isn’t going to get elected because of the color of his skin.”

    The first one says his skin colour is the reason he WILL NOT get elected.

    The second one (which is the one you told us about) suggest that he WILL BE elected for some reason OTHER than the colour of his skin.

    Like

  112. Careful with the grammer – these are two different sentences…

    “I think he isn’t going to get elected, because of the color of his skin.”
    “I think he isn’t going to get elected because of the color of his skin.”

    The first one says his skin colour is the reason he WILL NOT get elected.

    The second one (which is the one you told us about) suggest that he WILL BE elected for some reason OTHER than the colour of his skin.

    Like

  113. Robert

    You worked at one of the most racist companies in the world and never chose to say one word about it. With thousands of employees and sales rivalling gross national of many countries, how many black people has windows division ever had working there? even better, how many blacks have ever risen over level 61-62 (levels that are not even considered to be middle management)? Try perhaps 5 in the entire history of Windows division.

    You didnt seem to care at Microsoft and stayed silent there even after this was pointed out in the comment on an unrelated thread – why the sudden interest?

    Midge

    Like

  114. Robert

    You worked at one of the most racist companies in the world and never chose to say one word about it. With thousands of employees and sales rivalling gross national of many countries, how many black people has windows division ever had working there? even better, how many blacks have ever risen over level 61-62 (levels that are not even considered to be middle management)? Try perhaps 5 in the entire history of Windows division.

    You didnt seem to care at Microsoft and stayed silent there even after this was pointed out in the comment on an unrelated thread – why the sudden interest?

    Midge

    Like

  115. Unfortunately, my political beliefs square neither with the Dems or the Reps. I may not vote this coming election since there is no strong third party that supports my beliefs.

    I won’t vote for Barack not because he’s black, rather, I won’t vote for him because he’s far too liberal. Same goes for Clinton. They would ruin this country and hand it over to the UN. While I would prefer a strong third party instead of just two, we have to vote for who’s running. Edwards, Obama, Clinton… they’re all too liberal. And the Reps are fielding no one besides Rudy G. that’s any good at being a politician with a modicum of decency and honor. If Rudy runs, I’ll have to vote for him, since he’s the lesser of all the evils.

    Like

  116. Unfortunately, my political beliefs square neither with the Dems or the Reps. I may not vote this coming election since there is no strong third party that supports my beliefs.

    I won’t vote for Barack not because he’s black, rather, I won’t vote for him because he’s far too liberal. Same goes for Clinton. They would ruin this country and hand it over to the UN. While I would prefer a strong third party instead of just two, we have to vote for who’s running. Edwards, Obama, Clinton… they’re all too liberal. And the Reps are fielding no one besides Rudy G. that’s any good at being a politician with a modicum of decency and honor. If Rudy runs, I’ll have to vote for him, since he’s the lesser of all the evils.

    Like

  117. Saying He won’t be elected because of the color of his skin is something I agree with. It doesn’t mean anythign about me being racist. It means I believe racism does exist still & it, more than likely, will cost him enough votes that he will not be elected. So, when I read a statement like that from you, why would I come on and argue it if I believe it to be true.

    Like

  118. Saying He won’t be elected because of the color of his skin is something I agree with. It doesn’t mean anythign about me being racist. It means I believe racism does exist still & it, more than likely, will cost him enough votes that he will not be elected. So, when I read a statement like that from you, why would I come on and argue it if I believe it to be true.

    Like

  119. The majority of people I know, and probably you know, I can happily say are not racist and wouldn’t have a problem electing a black, yellow, green or purple person. The problem in your country is, that just like the people who voted in the current administration, the majority of Americans are stupid white men. Those people would never vote for a black person. Imagine the entire south and mid west voting for a black person????

    It will not happen in our life time.

    I think that is the point you were trying to make. While the people that most of us associate with don’t have a problem with it, the majority of dumb Americans would.

    BTW – I’m not taking a swing at Americans, I am Australian and we are just as guilty as you of electing a moron. We even have a state of rednecks who allowed a bigot to win a couple of state seats.

    Like

  120. The majority of people I know, and probably you know, I can happily say are not racist and wouldn’t have a problem electing a black, yellow, green or purple person. The problem in your country is, that just like the people who voted in the current administration, the majority of Americans are stupid white men. Those people would never vote for a black person. Imagine the entire south and mid west voting for a black person????

    It will not happen in our life time.

    I think that is the point you were trying to make. While the people that most of us associate with don’t have a problem with it, the majority of dumb Americans would.

    BTW – I’m not taking a swing at Americans, I am Australian and we are just as guilty as you of electing a moron. We even have a state of rednecks who allowed a bigot to win a couple of state seats.

    Like

  121. I’ll just throw out an idea here for discussion–one problem here is that the very *discussion* of the topic of racism exacerbates the problem of racism. Like a witch hunt, everything becomes racism. The more we talk about race, the more we divide ourselves by race. In the words of Morgan Freeman, the only way to get rid of racism is to “stop talking about it.”

    Personally, I get the impression that, as a nation, we’re still just too immature to handle the issue. There are always going to be parts of society–amongst all races–that are racist. That will (hopefully) change over time. We also seemingly aren’t mature enough to be able to distinguish between racism and appreciation of racial differences. But in one very real sense, the more we discuss it, the more it doesn’t go away. We aren’t mature enough yet to have a vision of what it would be like not to have racism, and there is a point to be made that it is due in part because we can’t envision not talking about it.

    Now, discuss. 😛

    Like

  122. I’ll just throw out an idea here for discussion–one problem here is that the very *discussion* of the topic of racism exacerbates the problem of racism. Like a witch hunt, everything becomes racism. The more we talk about race, the more we divide ourselves by race. In the words of Morgan Freeman, the only way to get rid of racism is to “stop talking about it.”

    Personally, I get the impression that, as a nation, we’re still just too immature to handle the issue. There are always going to be parts of society–amongst all races–that are racist. That will (hopefully) change over time. We also seemingly aren’t mature enough to be able to distinguish between racism and appreciation of racial differences. But in one very real sense, the more we discuss it, the more it doesn’t go away. We aren’t mature enough yet to have a vision of what it would be like not to have racism, and there is a point to be made that it is due in part because we can’t envision not talking about it.

    Now, discuss. 😛

    Like

  123. “Imagine the entire south and mid west voting for a black person????”

    “While the people that most of us associate with don’t have a problem with it, the majority of dumb Americans would.”

    For what it’s worth, Minneapolis is in the Midwest, and it was ranked as “America’s Smartest City” recently, and 3 of the top 5 were Midwestern cities (St. Paul, the “twin city” of Minneapolis, was ranked as #4). That was based on bachelor’s degress per capita, residents’ SAT scores, “creativity scores” (such as patents per capita), number of universities, locally-born Nobel Prize recipients, etc.

    I think the stereotyping of Midwesteners is quite unfair and not based on reality. Someone used the term “echo chamber” to describe what happens regarding attitudes on the coasts, but apparently it doesn’t end at the coastlines.

    Like

  124. “Imagine the entire south and mid west voting for a black person????”

    “While the people that most of us associate with don’t have a problem with it, the majority of dumb Americans would.”

    For what it’s worth, Minneapolis is in the Midwest, and it was ranked as “America’s Smartest City” recently, and 3 of the top 5 were Midwestern cities (St. Paul, the “twin city” of Minneapolis, was ranked as #4). That was based on bachelor’s degress per capita, residents’ SAT scores, “creativity scores” (such as patents per capita), number of universities, locally-born Nobel Prize recipients, etc.

    I think the stereotyping of Midwesteners is quite unfair and not based on reality. Someone used the term “echo chamber” to describe what happens regarding attitudes on the coasts, but apparently it doesn’t end at the coastlines.

    Like

  125. In 1999 the Gallup organisation asked the question:

    “If your party nominated a generally well-qualified person for president who happened to be a ‘X’ would you vote for that person?” “X” is Atheist, Baptist, Black, Catholic, Homosexual, Jewish, Mormon, and Woman.

    95% would vote for someone black, 92% for a woman, 59% for a homosexual, and 49% for an atheist.

    As a nation, you have bigger problems than racism! As a shining example of a nation founded on secular principles, the growing reverse trend is worrying.

    Like

  126. In 1999 the Gallup organisation asked the question:

    “If your party nominated a generally well-qualified person for president who happened to be a ‘X’ would you vote for that person?” “X” is Atheist, Baptist, Black, Catholic, Homosexual, Jewish, Mormon, and Woman.

    95% would vote for someone black, 92% for a woman, 59% for a homosexual, and 49% for an atheist.

    As a nation, you have bigger problems than racism! As a shining example of a nation founded on secular principles, the growing reverse trend is worrying.

    Like

  127. Downloaded the audio versions of Obama’s books from Audible.com. Listened to the man’s words in the man’s voice. His life, his, faith, his achievements, and the transparency of self that he captures in his writing and speaking; I remain impressed with him.

    And I agree that the color of his skin will be a factor in a political race in America, but mostly because many Americans believe that this is what many other Americans are thinking. I don’t think its necessarily a bad thing that skin color becomes an explicit talking point in a presidential election. The effects of racism are just as destructive to a society that continues to live largely in denial of the cultural divides in America.

    Like

  128. Downloaded the audio versions of Obama’s books from Audible.com. Listened to the man’s words in the man’s voice. His life, his, faith, his achievements, and the transparency of self that he captures in his writing and speaking; I remain impressed with him.

    And I agree that the color of his skin will be a factor in a political race in America, but mostly because many Americans believe that this is what many other Americans are thinking. I don’t think its necessarily a bad thing that skin color becomes an explicit talking point in a presidential election. The effects of racism are just as destructive to a society that continues to live largely in denial of the cultural divides in America.

    Like

  129. I hsven’t read all the comments because I’m pressed for time. However, I did want to focus on the one that is the most bigoted among the first thirty in my opinion.

    “I think that when racism is not turning into discrimination there is no problem. Racism is about peoples “inside” feelings and know body else can control them. To be honest I’m sick of leftist shit trying to be political correct. Let us be free to be racist and distinguish the beauties of difference.”

    Being ‘free to be racist’ means being free to deprive other folks of their rights. What Tomaat is calling for is EXACTLY what the post-Civil War amendments and civil rights law seek to end.

    Also, your assumption that you don’t associate with people who hold bigoted beliefs may not be accurate, Robert. Try discussing black people with Doc Searls or TDavid sometimes.

    In regard to your experiment, I think that if I, a person of color, were making the same statement, many white people would rush to tell me that Obama’s race is not an issue, precisely because it is.

    Like

  130. I hsven’t read all the comments because I’m pressed for time. However, I did want to focus on the one that is the most bigoted among the first thirty in my opinion.

    “I think that when racism is not turning into discrimination there is no problem. Racism is about peoples “inside” feelings and know body else can control them. To be honest I’m sick of leftist shit trying to be political correct. Let us be free to be racist and distinguish the beauties of difference.”

    Being ‘free to be racist’ means being free to deprive other folks of their rights. What Tomaat is calling for is EXACTLY what the post-Civil War amendments and civil rights law seek to end.

    Also, your assumption that you don’t associate with people who hold bigoted beliefs may not be accurate, Robert. Try discussing black people with Doc Searls or TDavid sometimes.

    In regard to your experiment, I think that if I, a person of color, were making the same statement, many white people would rush to tell me that Obama’s race is not an issue, precisely because it is.

    Like

  131. Just select a president who’s more interested in building bridges than bombing them. Thanks.

    That is quite normal for me to say because there’s an ocean between U.S. and us. Yeah, puns.

    @62 It’s definitely a challenge for his campaign organization; how they are going to handle that one? There comes so many bad associations, obstructing him.

    Like

  132. Just select a president who’s more interested in building bridges than bombing them. Thanks.

    That is quite normal for me to say because there’s an ocean between U.S. and us. Yeah, puns.

    @62 It’s definitely a challenge for his campaign organization; how they are going to handle that one? There comes so many bad associations, obstructing him.

    Like

  133. I’ve participated in numerous discussions on Obama and Clinton, and in every one I’ve made two statements. 1) I don’t think Obama can win because of his race 2) I don’t think Clinton can win because she’s a woman. That’s not racism, that’s acknowledgment that racist attitudes exist out there. I would vote for either over any other candidate out there.

    Elections aren’t usually landslides, they’re close. Each of those candidates will garner additional votes because of their race/sex but they will also lose votes for those reasons. I think attitudes, and demographics, have changed in this country – but not to the degree that the candidates won’t still suffer a net loss of votes.

    On the other hand, if Clinton and Obama would take a higher route, thinking of how this country would gain from their pairing as running mates rather than what they themselves would lose, I think you’d see a surefire win that would propel us into a more positive future.

    Like

  134. I’ve participated in numerous discussions on Obama and Clinton, and in every one I’ve made two statements. 1) I don’t think Obama can win because of his race 2) I don’t think Clinton can win because she’s a woman. That’s not racism, that’s acknowledgment that racist attitudes exist out there. I would vote for either over any other candidate out there.

    Elections aren’t usually landslides, they’re close. Each of those candidates will garner additional votes because of their race/sex but they will also lose votes for those reasons. I think attitudes, and demographics, have changed in this country – but not to the degree that the candidates won’t still suffer a net loss of votes.

    On the other hand, if Clinton and Obama would take a higher route, thinking of how this country would gain from their pairing as running mates rather than what they themselves would lose, I think you’d see a surefire win that would propel us into a more positive future.

    Like

  135. “I’m sick of the default. What about you?”

    Well I’m sick of reading about who might be running in an election that is almost two years away to be honest. I think it was Dave Winer who said recently that the elections in the US are are becoming a full-time issue nowadays. It’s getting ridiculous.

    Anyway the comment isn’t racist, of course it isn’t. I’m sure there’s a fair number of black people who have said it too, does that make them racists?

    Like

  136. “I’m sick of the default. What about you?”

    Well I’m sick of reading about who might be running in an election that is almost two years away to be honest. I think it was Dave Winer who said recently that the elections in the US are are becoming a full-time issue nowadays. It’s getting ridiculous.

    Anyway the comment isn’t racist, of course it isn’t. I’m sure there’s a fair number of black people who have said it too, does that make them racists?

    Like

  137. I am tired of the bias against southern states. Last time I checked New York was about to explode because of that black man who was killed by the police outside a nightclub, and LA isn’t known for it’s race friendly relations. Anyone in Massachusetts remember that murder case around 17 years ago where the white guy said a black man killed his wife when it was him? You think that won’t happen in Oregon, Seattle, or Vermont anytime soon??? Racism is everywhere. I am not saying there is no racism in the south, just that you northern/western ‘liberals’ should look at your all white neighborhoods first, and fix your states first.

    Like

  138. I am tired of the bias against southern states. Last time I checked New York was about to explode because of that black man who was killed by the police outside a nightclub, and LA isn’t known for it’s race friendly relations. Anyone in Massachusetts remember that murder case around 17 years ago where the white guy said a black man killed his wife when it was him? You think that won’t happen in Oregon, Seattle, or Vermont anytime soon??? Racism is everywhere. I am not saying there is no racism in the south, just that you northern/western ‘liberals’ should look at your all white neighborhoods first, and fix your states first.

    Like

  139. Hey podesta – don’t recognize you, sorry. Are you dropping my name in this conversation for any particular reason?

    For whatever it’s worth, Robert or anybody else reading is welcome to contact me to talk about any topic. I’m easy to find 😉

    I don’t have much to say about the topic except I’d like to see the Clintons back in the White House.

    I’d take them over any candidate I’ve seen and the current abomination in office. And you know if Hilary is in the White House Bill is too and I’ll gladly take him and his intern screwing antics over anybody else in the field at the moment.

    I wish the elections were here now, in fact. We can’t get Bush out of office soon enough for our economy to further go into the toilet and a senseless war to claim more of our brave men and women soldiers.

    Like

  140. Hey podesta – don’t recognize you, sorry. Are you dropping my name in this conversation for any particular reason?

    For whatever it’s worth, Robert or anybody else reading is welcome to contact me to talk about any topic. I’m easy to find 😉

    I don’t have much to say about the topic except I’d like to see the Clintons back in the White House.

    I’d take them over any candidate I’ve seen and the current abomination in office. And you know if Hilary is in the White House Bill is too and I’ll gladly take him and his intern screwing antics over anybody else in the field at the moment.

    I wish the elections were here now, in fact. We can’t get Bush out of office soon enough for our economy to further go into the toilet and a senseless war to claim more of our brave men and women soldiers.

    Like

  141. Osama shouldn’t be President because he’s not qualified. Scoble, what about the people that are saying Mitt Romney has no chance because he’s LDS? (Mormon?) Colin Powell was pulling pretty good numbers a few years ago when people were lobbying for him to run. I don’t recall anyone mentioning he had no chance because of the color of his skin.

    I think the thing that will work against Osama is his name, (add his middle name: Hussein, to that) and well, his past apparent cocaine use. Couple with the fact he has no significant accomplishments to show for. Repeat after me: “Senators do not get elected President”

    Like

  142. Osama shouldn’t be President because he’s not qualified. Scoble, what about the people that are saying Mitt Romney has no chance because he’s LDS? (Mormon?) Colin Powell was pulling pretty good numbers a few years ago when people were lobbying for him to run. I don’t recall anyone mentioning he had no chance because of the color of his skin.

    I think the thing that will work against Osama is his name, (add his middle name: Hussein, to that) and well, his past apparent cocaine use. Couple with the fact he has no significant accomplishments to show for. Repeat after me: “Senators do not get elected President”

    Like

  143. “I’ll certainly be leaning towards voting for whoever DOESN’T try to put it as the Democrats against the Republicans, or the rich against the poor.”

    Well you can cross Edwards off that list as well. He’s still going with that “two Americas” thing that did him in in 2004. What did Einstein say the definition of insanity was? Doing the same thing over again and expecting a different result?

    Like

  144. “I’ll certainly be leaning towards voting for whoever DOESN’T try to put it as the Democrats against the Republicans, or the rich against the poor.”

    Well you can cross Edwards off that list as well. He’s still going with that “two Americas” thing that did him in in 2004. What did Einstein say the definition of insanity was? Doing the same thing over again and expecting a different result?

    Like

  145. Scoble do you even know the definition of “racism”? Based on your post I submit that you don’t. This country has seen fit to apply the “r” word to every racial situation they see. That’s because of the heavy connotation the word carries.

    What you are describing is more bigotry than racism. And there IS a difference. I don’t think there are many in this country that would think a black man is incapable of being president BECAUSE of his race. THAT would be racism. What you describe is people not wanting to vote for Osama because he is black. That is bigotry. Use the terms properly.

    Now, I submit that Osama won his Senatorial race because he is both Black and a Democrat. The voters wanted to see themselves as enlightened. Here’s a question for you: Can a Black Republican be elected President? Would Osama have a this much gravitas if he was a Republican? How many times have we seen blacks and liberals accuse black conservatives of being “Uncle Toms”? Clarence Thomas? Colin Powell? Condi Rice?, JC Watts? So what do you call that type of judgmentalism?

    Like

  146. Scoble do you even know the definition of “racism”? Based on your post I submit that you don’t. This country has seen fit to apply the “r” word to every racial situation they see. That’s because of the heavy connotation the word carries.

    What you are describing is more bigotry than racism. And there IS a difference. I don’t think there are many in this country that would think a black man is incapable of being president BECAUSE of his race. THAT would be racism. What you describe is people not wanting to vote for Osama because he is black. That is bigotry. Use the terms properly.

    Now, I submit that Osama won his Senatorial race because he is both Black and a Democrat. The voters wanted to see themselves as enlightened. Here’s a question for you: Can a Black Republican be elected President? Would Osama have a this much gravitas if he was a Republican? How many times have we seen blacks and liberals accuse black conservatives of being “Uncle Toms”? Clarence Thomas? Colin Powell? Condi Rice?, JC Watts? So what do you call that type of judgmentalism?

    Like

  147. @86. Really? Tell that to Ted Kennedy. He calls him Osama. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=APx2YJ-_jos
    And then CNN makes the same association…THE OTHER WAY!!! http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/CNN_comments_on_Obama_gaffe_in_0101.htm.

    So, if a Senator in HIS OWN PARTY makes the slip, and a News organization partial to him can make the mistake, how likely do you think the uniformed voter will be to make the same association come election time? Like it or not, some people will associate his first and middle name with two of the most hated figures in the US since Hitler.

    Like

  148. @86. Really? Tell that to Ted Kennedy. He calls him Osama. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=APx2YJ-_jos
    And then CNN makes the same association…THE OTHER WAY!!! http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/CNN_comments_on_Obama_gaffe_in_0101.htm.

    So, if a Senator in HIS OWN PARTY makes the slip, and a News organization partial to him can make the mistake, how likely do you think the uniformed voter will be to make the same association come election time? Like it or not, some people will associate his first and middle name with two of the most hated figures in the US since Hitler.

    Like

  149. Is it considered racism if you hate everyone equally?

    By the way, I wonder what Al Gore thinks of the media forgetting about his “movie”. If I were Gore I’d just learn to lay low and make a few $billion with Google for now.

    Like

  150. Is it considered racism if you hate everyone equally?

    By the way, I wonder what Al Gore thinks of the media forgetting about his “movie”. If I were Gore I’d just learn to lay low and make a few $billion with Google for now.

    Like

  151. I don’t think it would be considered racism if you hate everyone equally as long as you can turn that hatred inward as well. You are what you hate, right?

    The media forgot about Al Gore’s movie? I guess the Oscar nod and flood of articles about it after the nomination are considered “forgetting” then?

    Like

  152. I don’t think it would be considered racism if you hate everyone equally as long as you can turn that hatred inward as well. You are what you hate, right?

    The media forgot about Al Gore’s movie? I guess the Oscar nod and flood of articles about it after the nomination are considered “forgetting” then?

    Like

  153. This pretty much put’s it all into a nice little package. Don’t get
    >me wrong I have and work with many black people and they are my friends but
    >if I wore a shirt to work that say 100% WHITE oh boy they’d be pissed and
    >I’d be a racist. I just don’t get it…?
    If this hurts your feelings, Please let me know!
    Proud To Be White
    Someone
    Finally said it.
    How many are actually
    Paying attention to this?
    There are African Americans,
    Mexican Americans,
    Asian Americans, Arab
    Americans, Native Americans, etc.
    And then there are just Americans.
    **************************
    You pass me on the street
    And sneer in my direction.
    You Call me “White
    Boy,” “Cracker,” “Honkey,”
    “Whitey,” “Caveman”
    . And that’s OK.
    But when I call you, Nigger,
    Kike, Towel head,
    Sand-nigger, camel Jockey,
    Beaner, Gook, or Chink …
    You call me a racist.
    ****************************
    You say that whites commit
    A lot of violence against you,
    So why are the ghettos
    The most dangerous places to live?
    You have the United Negro
    College Fund. You have
    Martin Luther King Day.
    You have Black History Month.
    You have Cesar Chavez
    Day. You have Yom Hashoah. You
    Have Ma’uled Al-Nabi.
    You have the NAACP.
    You have BET.
    If we had WET (White Entertainment
    Television)

    We’d be racists.
    **************************

    If we had a White Pride
    Day .
    You would call us racists.
    *************************

    If we had White History
    Month .
    We’d be racists.
    **************************
    If we had any organization
    For only whites to “advance” OUR
    Lives .
    We’d be racists.
    **************************

    We have a Hispanic Chamber
    Of Commerce, a Black
    Chamber of Commerce, and
    Then we just have the plain
    Chamber of Commerce.
    Wonder who pays for that?
    If we had a college fund
    That only gave white students
    Scholarships

    … You know we’d be racists.
    *************************

    There are over 60 openly
    Proclaimed Black Colleges in
    The US , yet if there
    Were “White colleges” …
    THAT would be a racist college.
    ****************************

    In the Million Man March,
    You believed that you were
    Marching for your race
    And rights. If we marched for our race and rights,
    You would call us racists.
    ***************************

    You are proud to be black,
    Brown, yellow and orange, and you’re not afraid to anounce it.
    But when we announce our
    White pride …
    You call us racists.
    **************************
    You rob us, carjack us,
    And shoot at us.
    But, when a white police
    Officer shoots a black gang member or
    beats up a black drug-dealer running
    From the law and posing a threat to society
    You call him a racist.
    ****************************

    I am proud.
    But, you call me a racist.

    ***************************

    Why is it that only whites
    Can be racists?
    I hope no one is offended by this
    That is not my goal, my goal is to wake some sort of us not I we not me

    Like

  154. This pretty much put’s it all into a nice little package. Don’t get
    >me wrong I have and work with many black people and they are my friends but
    >if I wore a shirt to work that say 100% WHITE oh boy they’d be pissed and
    >I’d be a racist. I just don’t get it…?
    If this hurts your feelings, Please let me know!
    Proud To Be White
    Someone
    Finally said it.
    How many are actually
    Paying attention to this?
    There are African Americans,
    Mexican Americans,
    Asian Americans, Arab
    Americans, Native Americans, etc.
    And then there are just Americans.
    **************************
    You pass me on the street
    And sneer in my direction.
    You Call me “White
    Boy,” “Cracker,” “Honkey,”
    “Whitey,” “Caveman”
    . And that’s OK.
    But when I call you, Nigger,
    Kike, Towel head,
    Sand-nigger, camel Jockey,
    Beaner, Gook, or Chink …
    You call me a racist.
    ****************************
    You say that whites commit
    A lot of violence against you,
    So why are the ghettos
    The most dangerous places to live?
    You have the United Negro
    College Fund. You have
    Martin Luther King Day.
    You have Black History Month.
    You have Cesar Chavez
    Day. You have Yom Hashoah. You
    Have Ma’uled Al-Nabi.
    You have the NAACP.
    You have BET.
    If we had WET (White Entertainment
    Television)

    We’d be racists.
    **************************

    If we had a White Pride
    Day .
    You would call us racists.
    *************************

    If we had White History
    Month .
    We’d be racists.
    **************************
    If we had any organization
    For only whites to “advance” OUR
    Lives .
    We’d be racists.
    **************************

    We have a Hispanic Chamber
    Of Commerce, a Black
    Chamber of Commerce, and
    Then we just have the plain
    Chamber of Commerce.
    Wonder who pays for that?
    If we had a college fund
    That only gave white students
    Scholarships

    … You know we’d be racists.
    *************************

    There are over 60 openly
    Proclaimed Black Colleges in
    The US , yet if there
    Were “White colleges” …
    THAT would be a racist college.
    ****************************

    In the Million Man March,
    You believed that you were
    Marching for your race
    And rights. If we marched for our race and rights,
    You would call us racists.
    ***************************

    You are proud to be black,
    Brown, yellow and orange, and you’re not afraid to anounce it.
    But when we announce our
    White pride …
    You call us racists.
    **************************
    You rob us, carjack us,
    And shoot at us.
    But, when a white police
    Officer shoots a black gang member or
    beats up a black drug-dealer running
    From the law and posing a threat to society
    You call him a racist.
    ****************************

    I am proud.
    But, you call me a racist.

    ***************************

    Why is it that only whites
    Can be racists?
    I hope no one is offended by this
    That is not my goal, my goal is to wake some sort of us not I we not me

    Like

  155. Injustice has put it too simply, and indulged in some fallacies. This is a topic that requires some reflection and subtlety – if the problem were simple, it would be resolved.

    I say that last because there is an enormous will to efface racism from our national discourse and personal attitudes. People are embarassed to be racist – and this is a real step forward. There are now and will always be people who lack the clarity and self-control to deal with the different == antagonist feature that comes standard with human beings (look at the manual – it’s listed as a known bug :), just as we haven’t yet nailed down the wifebeaters and cheaters and adulterers and theives and murderers and etc. Obama will rise or fall on his character – because there really are very few that let race override all other considerations now. We’ve just seen too many good and competent folk to let the tropes of ‘inferiority’ overtake us completely.

    I’ve lived outside the States in several parts of the world, and seen the racism that abides in these places. Let me tell you, since you obviously don’t know, that the “default racism” is MUCH less destructive than the daily, bald-faced, rampant racism that prevails in many parts of Europe. Yeah, they’re civilized here, but scorn for people of different ethnicities and nationalities is a part of life.

    We work actively to keep this from infecting our children – but we’re anxious to go back to the States so we don’t have to be so darned vigilant all the time. There are still places in the US that things are “bad” – but there’s nowhere in the US that’s as bad as most of the rest of the world, and here I include the Deep South and South Central. Things are pretty tame here in comparison to the greater part of humanity.

    Just some perspective.

    Like

  156. Injustice has put it too simply, and indulged in some fallacies. This is a topic that requires some reflection and subtlety – if the problem were simple, it would be resolved.

    I say that last because there is an enormous will to efface racism from our national discourse and personal attitudes. People are embarassed to be racist – and this is a real step forward. There are now and will always be people who lack the clarity and self-control to deal with the different == antagonist feature that comes standard with human beings (look at the manual – it’s listed as a known bug :), just as we haven’t yet nailed down the wifebeaters and cheaters and adulterers and theives and murderers and etc. Obama will rise or fall on his character – because there really are very few that let race override all other considerations now. We’ve just seen too many good and competent folk to let the tropes of ‘inferiority’ overtake us completely.

    I’ve lived outside the States in several parts of the world, and seen the racism that abides in these places. Let me tell you, since you obviously don’t know, that the “default racism” is MUCH less destructive than the daily, bald-faced, rampant racism that prevails in many parts of Europe. Yeah, they’re civilized here, but scorn for people of different ethnicities and nationalities is a part of life.

    We work actively to keep this from infecting our children – but we’re anxious to go back to the States so we don’t have to be so darned vigilant all the time. There are still places in the US that things are “bad” – but there’s nowhere in the US that’s as bad as most of the rest of the world, and here I include the Deep South and South Central. Things are pretty tame here in comparison to the greater part of humanity.

    Just some perspective.

    Like

  157. Pingback: particle size
  158. Barack Hussein Obama’s father, stepfather and grandfather were Muslims. He was by Islamic law born a Muslim. This cannot be changed. Mohammed said if anyone turns his back on Islam, kill him. Why no death threats by radical Muslims? Do they know something we don’t? Obama became a Christian when he started having political ambitions. (read up on his church for a shock) How do we know he’s a Christian? Because he says so? The principle of Al-Takeyya conveys the understanding that Muslims are permitted to lie.
    He is indeed a liar. Not only about being a Muslim has he lied, but he stated that his father was a ‘goat herder’ when he was a prosperous farmer. He’s an admitted drug user. He was involved in a shady real estate deal with a guy who associated with radical Muslims. He has demonstrated his immaturity by trying to get Fox banned from his news conferences, and by warning against making fun of his ears. He’s an empty suit pimped by the media. As someone said, the presidency is not an entry level position.

    Like

  159. Barack Hussein Obama’s father, stepfather and grandfather were Muslims. He was by Islamic law born a Muslim. This cannot be changed. Mohammed said if anyone turns his back on Islam, kill him. Why no death threats by radical Muslims? Do they know something we don’t? Obama became a Christian when he started having political ambitions. (read up on his church for a shock) How do we know he’s a Christian? Because he says so? The principle of Al-Takeyya conveys the understanding that Muslims are permitted to lie.
    He is indeed a liar. Not only about being a Muslim has he lied, but he stated that his father was a ‘goat herder’ when he was a prosperous farmer. He’s an admitted drug user. He was involved in a shady real estate deal with a guy who associated with radical Muslims. He has demonstrated his immaturity by trying to get Fox banned from his news conferences, and by warning against making fun of his ears. He’s an empty suit pimped by the media. As someone said, the presidency is not an entry level position.

    Like

Comments are closed.