Thread: "The First African-American President"

Originally Posted by drewmandan

I just call em like I see em. Maybe you don't want to see it because you're enthralled by him. I almost got caught up in it too. But then I started to notice the things people were saying.

The fact is, whether you'll admit it or not, it became a moral issue to vote for him, at least in the urban centers. There are many places in America where you would get literally beaten if you tell someone you didn't vote for Obama.

As is said many times in this forum, I was gunning for Ron Paul. Your "moral issue" and "enthralled" comments (as pertains to me) would be insubstantial.

Perhaps you interpreted things the way you did because you expected people to react in a way that said McCain's winning would have been racist. I was a really late bloomer, when it came to Obama, and it wasn't until very close to the election that I actually started pulling for him.

I've actually never heard of that before. In any case we definitely wouldn't be calling him anything different if his mother was black and father was white.

Originally Posted by Mes Tarrant

In any case we definitely wouldn't be calling him anything different if his mother was black and father was white.

What makes you so sure?

[Edit: I'm looking into the "Father's Side vs. Mother's Side" thing. It looks like it's changed a few times, over the years, and I'm trying to find out what it's settled upon.]

Yeah it's an interesting thing to look into. I'm trying to think of any celebs we know of who have parents like that...

Originally Posted by Mes Tarrant

Yeah it's an interesting thing to look into. I'm trying to think of any celebs we know of who have parents like that...

Here are a few that are not exactly the same decent as Obama's parents but they are all bi-racial black/white.

Halle Berry - Actress, is the daughter of a White mother and Black father.



Jennifer Beals - Actress, is the daughter of a White mother and Black father.



Persia White - Actress, her father is Black Bahamian and her mother is a White.




Grant Hill - Basket ball player is the son of a black (bi-racial) father and white mother.




Tons more listed at this site also.
http://www.blackflix.com/articles/multiracial.html

Some celeb's I had no idea were bi-racial. Very interesting.

Those support O's point... I was hoping to find ones with a white father and a black mother!

Maybe black chicks just don't go for white dudes. I don't blame them sometimes.

I wasn't questioning the historical significance of this event, I was merely pointing out that the event is significant because he's black, not because his genetic roots are in Africa. The halfness of his blackness is irrelevant because the significance lies in the fact that he is not fully white.

Originally Posted by Serkat

I wasn't questioning the historical significance of this event, I was merely pointing out that the event is significant because he's black, not because his genetic roots are in Africa. The halfness of his blackness is irrelevant because the significance lies in the fact that he is not fully white.

I'm not sure I understand this. You're saying that the event is not significant because he's "African American," but because he's anything but white?

If that's what you're saying, I think you're wrong. There is no other culture (except for maybe the Native Americans) who have undergone the type of adversity from whites as the blacks have, over the years. There is no other culture (possibly not in numbers, just as well as in influence) that this occasion would have so many implications for - were Obama of any other color. This should be painfully obvious. Is this what you're disputing?

His being "African American" is the alternative label for his being black. I understand that what you mean is that even a white person can be "African American," but the moniker is what has been attached to blacks of African descent. (That is not to say that it doesn't technically apply to whites of African lineage either. I actually haven't seen a case where that's proven to the contrary.) What you seem to be arguing is semantics...and how important are they, really? It is just a label - a widely accepted one - even if not as "all encompassing" as it should be.

My two cents then.

Yes, we must recognize the historical significance of the first non-white president. Up until a few generations ago, white people dominated the political spectrum, and now that has changed. It shows that we are moving away from our racist ancestors, and starting to accept people as they should be, as people. This is a great day for the human race, and should be a point of reflection to show how far we have come thanks to MLK and the Civil Rights Movement.

Now, as for the politics, this was the year for the Democrats. In fact, it was their perfect storm. Bush has been widely criticized, and the GOP has been beaten up too many times in the last eight years for there to be a strong Republican push. McCain did well, very well considering the circumstances. But it was the Democratic race to lose. Remember how everyone assumed Hillary would win? Or look at how many seats the Democrats have now in the Senate, almost at the 60-40 mark! So, does it surprise me that Obama, a Democrat, won over a Republican? No.

But do I think race played a factor into his victory? You bet I do! Look at Hillary with her army of women behind her. Of course the minority will rally behind a leader that represents hope and change. I heard on the news about churches that rallied their members to go vote for Obama because of his race. This really was a change: the church and the right have been buddies for a LONG time. Of course race played a part. Only a fool would debate otherwise.

As for him being part black. Or part "African-American", depending on how PC you want to be. Yes, his father is from Kenya. Great. Is this going to change the way he tackles the economic mess? No. So what does it matter? He is a symbol now of African Americans. If it turned out that his father was really from Indiana and he got his color from his great-great-great grandfather, he still would be a symbol of hope for the colored minority of America.

*Side note: I wanted McCain for many reasons, one being the lack of experience Obama has and I disagree with him on fundamental ways that government should operate. But we still should recognize how far we have come to equality. Then we need to move on and tackle the issues*

Originally Posted by Oneironaut

I'm not sure I understand this. You're saying that the event is not significant because he's "African American," but because he's anything but white?

Sorry, I phrased that wrong. I meant to say the same as you, as in: He is visibly part-black which is what is relevant.

His being "African American" is the alternative label for his being black. I understand that what you mean is that even a white person can be "African American," but the moniker is what has been attached to blacks of African descent. (That is not to say that it doesn't technically apply to whites of African lineage either. I actually haven't seen a case where that's proven to the contrary.) What you seem to be arguing is semantics...and how important are they, really?

I think they are incredibly important really, especially in this case, because African-American just sounds part-African, part-American... which is false and misleading, since it's just Americans of a specific skin color. The "African" part pertains to genetics, the "American" part pertains to citizenship and culture. They don't have anything to do with one another.

So really they're full-American with specific features... so calling them African-American is like calling all gay Americans Homo-Americans... why would you do that other than to imply that somehow there's something wrong with them being American?

And yes, my point is that shifting an adjective to a compound noun that becomes a set term to refer to a group of people is a highly significant process. You use the adjective to selectively refer to specific features of people... but you use the nouns to create and refer to groups of people... so you wouldn't refer to a gay American as "gay American" all the time, unless in the case where his gayness actually has anything to do with what you're talking about. However, when it's a set noun phrase, you invoke his gayness constantly and thereby single that person out for one specific personal feature, and also put all these people in a distinct group identified by one shared characteristic.

Neither racial features nor sexual orientation have anything to do with ones cultural or national identity. So all it does is further separation by combining two terms that don't relate to one another in any significant or meaningful way.

I have a different view on why this is historic I think...

I think during the 90's especially we moved away from racism greatly, so its no suprise to me that black politicians who have good ideas are moved to the forefront and do well. Here is what I really think this signifies though...I think this is showing progress not so much racism wise, but economics wise.

I feel that this shows to me that not only are blacks MOSTLY treated equal by everyone now, but they now are also gaining ecnomic equality as well. I think Obama's story illustrates this very well. So, my feeling is, yeah, its great that a black man with ideas finally got recognized for the office...but even better it shows that MLK's dream of bringing blacks above the slums and the crime is indeed beginning to progress, and that is great for our country's unity.

Puffy puffy words are puffy. I want to see some results. And I will be waiting, and waiting. Like all of you.

Originally Posted by drewmandan

But you're insinuating that anyone who didn't vote for him is a racist, or at the very least, is wrong for voting on issues instead of skin colour.

seriously drew, you have issues

I insinuated nothing

the studies of the polls show us that our election was more about the youth versus old, than skin color

Originally Posted by Serkat

\ Secondly, African isn't even an ethnicity,

Hmm...Are you stupid?

Originally Posted by malac

Hmm...Are you stupid?

No, I am in fact intelligent, highly even.

Originally Posted by juroara

the studies of the polls show us that our election was more about the youth versus old, than skin color

Do you understand what this statement actually implies? The only way to prove that there was no racial bias would be to look at a group like blacks and see what percentage of them voted for Obama. If it's close to the election results as a whole, then you're probably right. But if it turns out that 90% of blacks voted for Obama, then there definitely was racial bias.

I think Obama's election is significant not only politically but also culturally. I believe America needs more black role models who are not rappers or gangsters.

America needs more black role models who are not rappers or gangsters.

I 100% agree.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=65I0HNvTDH4


now on-topic.... I don't picture him as black.. well partially but it really doesn't bother me. I don't care what race someone is as long as they are qualified. I hope everyone respects him if he can't do what he promised because what's a president without support.. Not supporting someone in charge of you isn't good.

I liked his speech. He made a big thing peaceful foreign policy, and most interestingly of rescuing scientific progress... and he even said 'hi' to the atheists. So different from Bush.

Originally Posted by Serkat

Sorry, I phrased that wrong. I meant to say the same as you, as in: He is visibly part-black which is what is relevant.

I think they are incredibly important really, especially in this case, because African-American just sounds part-African, part-American... which is false and misleading, since it's just Americans of a specific skin color. The "African" part pertains to genetics, the "American" part pertains to citizenship and culture. They don't have anything to do with one another.

So really they're full-American with specific features... so calling them African-American is like calling all gay Americans Homo-Americans... why would you do that other than to imply that somehow there's something wrong with them being American?

And yes, my point is that shifting an adjective to a compound noun that becomes a set term to refer to a group of people is a highly significant process. You use the adjective to selectively refer to specific features of people... but you use the nouns to create and refer to groups of people... so you wouldn't refer to a gay American as "gay American" all the time, unless in the case where his gayness actually has anything to do with what you're talking about. However, when it's a set noun phrase, you invoke his gayness constantly and thereby single that person out for one specific personal feature, and also put all these people in a distinct group identified by one shared characteristic.

Neither racial features nor sexual orientation have anything to do with ones cultural or national identity. So all it does is further separation by combining two terms that don't relate to one another in any significant or meaningful way.

Though, in this particular instance, the semantics really aren't important. What I meant by the title was to bring reference to Obama's being (technically, even if only by rule of dominant gene) "black." "African-American" was the term that I used, because it is the term being most commonly used. I believe you got so stuck on the term itself that you missed the point. I was asking what people thought of all the talk of their being a "black" President.

I enjoyed listening to the speech given by our first mulatto president.

I hope he does well, because if he fucks up now, it affects us all. :/

Originally Posted by Oneironaut

Though, in this particular instance, the semantics really aren't important. What I meant by the title was to bring reference to Obama's being (technically, even if only by rule of dominant gene) "black." "African-American" was the term that I used, because it is the term being most commonly used. I believe you got so stuck on the term itself that you missed the point. I was asking what people thought of all the talk of their being a "black" President.

Oh OK sorry.

Well, of course I recognize the historical significance of this, however I do feel that there's a limit to how often something can be repeated before it feels like you're getting bukkake'd with it and you just hope you get your 50 bucks and never see those men again... dirty reporters.

see the second post in this thread
http://www.dreamviews.com/community/...ad.php?t=47865

America, the land where you're always a different nationality to the truth....