Might as well address this BS. It isn't that America won't vote for a black man or some other minority. It is just that America won't vote for THIS black man. No track record, ultra-liberal and too far left, Marxist tendencies and a definite tilt to Socilaism as the cure for what ails us. Race is only injected into this race by the left and the dems because they HATE it that we don't all think as they. They simply cannot bring themselves to believe we ALL aren't cheering on their views. Therefore it must be rampant racism preventing us from voting for the Jr Senator. Racism is when 90+% of blacks are supporting the BO beczause he LOOKS like them. THAT IS RACISM!

Yea but I hope thee are enough racists to vote aganist Obama to keep him out of the White House

See what a waste of time it is to talk about race?
It is a political smokescreen put up by the democrats to hide their political agenda. Most blacks are democrats so it stands to reason that they would vote the democratic candidate. The democrats  spend millions making sure that blacks remain democrats.

was neither White nor Black. Jindal got elected in Louisiana a fairly conservative state with significant African American population.

How did that happen?

I can say emphatically that there are literally millions of people who won't vote for Obama simply because he is black. There have already been several comments by children where my wife teaches about never voting for a n_____.

About your accusation of blacks being racist, imagine yourself in their position. You have a chance to vote for someone who is a serious candidate for the top office of your nation of your own ethnicity for the first time in that nation's history. This after being enslaved and subjected to decades of the most degrading treatment imaginable. Would you vote for that person? I sure as hell would, especially since he espouses programs which would benefit me.

I can say that racism exits among the black population.  All you have to do is look to the city of Atlanta government. We have had a black mayor, majority black city council for the past 30 years.  They have treated the city as their own little fiefdom making it difficult for a non-black to get city contracts, to get appointed to any positions in the city.  

Look at the concessions at the Atlanta Airport. If you are a white business owner you must have a "minority" (black) joint business partner to do business there. In the northeast if you have to pay off the mob to do business it is called extortion.

Amazingly only one of the black mayors has been indicted and convicted (Bill Campbell), his mentor Maynard Jackson, the first black mayor and biggest crook was smart enough to go to his grave without ever facing indictment.  The current mayor, Shirly Franklin, whose former husband (David Franklin who was Maynard Jackson's former law partner even though he was never a member of the Ga. Bar) had several airport concessions which were closed for failure to pay state sales tax.  Mr. Franklin, was the center of much litigation in his life for ripping off former clients such as Richard Pryor.

My point is that the black Democratic machine in Atlanta is both corrupt and racist.  Anyone with an IQ above 75 that has lived here for more than 5 minutes knows that to be the truth.

Blacks in Atlanta continue to perpetuate racism by the Atlanta Black Arts Festival, 100 Black Men of Atlanta, Miss Black Georgia.  Imagine if whites had the audacity to have these exclusive enclaves.

...would you think that is a racist comment.

Of course it is.  It is also stupid.  The same is true for your comment.

The truth is there are racist Republicans, racist Democrats, racist whites, racist blacks, racist Mexicans, etc.  Unfortunately racism doesn't really have the kind of boundaries that you have imagined.

are still defending Obama, and crying about past injustices.
These people are what I describe as "white guilt" in America.
Wormwood's comment is a classic example.

Now they are trying to shove Affirmitive Action for POTUS down our throat.

Affirmitive Action is like socialism, it doesn't work in the real world. Just because some lily white libs suffer from the guilt of having had an easy life doesn't make an Ultra lib, appeasing, socialist like Obama fit to be POTUS.

I am with Box of Rocks, I am not white and I don't suffer for white guilt. I don't care if Obama was green, he isn't fit to be POTUS. Making the election about race is going to make him any more fit for the job.

how about :

1. those who will not vote for Senator Obama, or any other African-Mmerican candidate, solely becuse of the fact of the candidate's racial background, those folks are clearly rascist

2. those who will not vote for Senator Obama because of disagreement with his stated positions are presumed NOT to be raccist

3. those who vote for Senatoe McCain because of agreemen with his positions are presumed NOT to be racist

4. African-Americans who vote for Senator Obama because of party loyalties are presumed NOT to be racist.


5. The guys I am most interesed in are African-American Republicans: how many, if any, of those folks are going to cross party lines and vote for Senator Obama?   I generaly don't buy into polling data, but if any of thos numbers become available I will be very interested to see how they work out.

The Racist word, like the anti-Semitism word, is like a 50 pound chunk of plutonium, and the conaequences of being made the target of such accusations are generally devastating.  Neither is to be bandied about lightly.  And maybe I'm naive, but it might not hurt to be a little more willing to extend to others the bebefit of the doubt [and likewise have them extend to others the benefit of the doubt] no matter what their expected or actual voting behavior turns out to be.

if what you are after is justifying your own racism.  

None of your comments address anything I said.

FWIW, I completely agree about the machine in ATL.

Maybe exaggerate is the wrong word but you either unintentionally or not, seem to confuse black voters today with those that were actually enslaved.

Many black voters today that are older than about 50 do indeed have direct experience with pre-civil rights revolution America where they were subjected to ‘the most degrading treatment’ (short of enslavement of course). Blacks since then are in a kind of THIRD PHASE of racial evolution. Many have thrived and prospered. Some have even seen the light and become conservatives. Yes, there is still racism (more hidden than open), but their plight now is more one of economics than race. I don’t know the numbers but there are significant numbers today that spend too much energy focusing on the FIRST phase (slavery) or SECOND phase (Jim Crow South) of racial evolution. Your own post re-enforces this viewpoint.

My problem is that there is no definition available today nor on the horizon that defines some kind of a FOURTH generation. Indeed, the so called ‘black leaders’ Jackson, Sharpton, etal. seem keenly intent on preventing the definition from surfacing.

BTW, racism is partly why I previously predicted that the first black President will be a Republican,


-- Modified on 9/21/2008 1:55:07 PM

I think racism is defined by its hostility to other races. I don't know, it seems to me that there's some difference between wanting a black man to be president and wanting to take white people's property away, terrorize them with lynchings and beatings, ban them from black only public places, treat them like slaves, make them slaves, and then murder them.

Am I right? Do you see a difference?

If you replace "black" with "white," "Atlanta" with "US," and "mayor" with "president...this all sounds very familiar and a hell of a lot more accurate.  

You're terrible at making your case.  

-- Modified on 9/21/2008 5:35:51 PM

It's impossible for most white folks in the U.S. to understand what it's like to be black, to be of an ethnicity that has been enslaved, to have relatives who were lynched, to remember or have parents who remember Lester Maddox's antics, to remember J.B. Stoner running for governor of GA, the US senate, and lieutenant governor only 30 years ago on the platform of keeping "niggers in their place" and getting over 70,000 votes. It's easy for white people to dismiss David Duke but he didn't advocate killing white people. It's really easy to say, "let's jsut forgive and forget" when you're the injuring party.

Maybe your family and community heritage don't affect your views but, here in the south, there are hundreds of thousands of white people who haven't forgotten the civil war yet. Hell, my neighbor wants me to join the Sons of the Confederacy. It's no wonder at all that so many blacks remember Jim Crow and lynchings.

I agree about Jackson, Sharpton, etc.  Perhaps Obama represents the 4th stage you are talking about? He certainly has tried to keep race from becoming the central issue of the campaign.

As for the first black president being republican, Colin Powell had his chance but he just couldn't stomach the despicable, lying assholes who run the party.

Today's black voters were never enslaved. I believe you never intended to say they had been but it's a nuance that is abused by some.

I lived in the south during most of the Civil Rights Movement.

Do you think having a more effective political organization might have had something to do with it?

I have first hand experience with racism in the deep south. I have been refused employment and told "we don't hire your kind here", "why don't you go back where you came from" I still get stupid statement occasionally to this day. So yes, I do understand racism a hell of a lot better than any white bread liberal posting here.

Crying racism at every perceived slight is not the answer, attempting to extort retribution from those not responisible is also not the answer. Unfortunately the best answer IS to just suck it up and make the best life for you and your family possible.

As far as Colin Powell goes, it isn't just the Republican party he couldn't stand. Both parties are equally guilty. If you honestly believe the Democrats are somehow above any of this, you got another thing coming

is not only racist, but stupid. Just as stupid as saying that it is time for a woman POTUS regardless of her politics.

Any white person that feels so badly for things HIS ancestors did is more than able to donate everything HE owns to assuage his guilt, just keep your hands out of my wallet. I don't expect to be compensated for my suffering at the hands of the "White Man", but I'll be damned if I am going to pay for the actions of others long dead and buried.

Do YOU see the difference?

What makes you think that black people are incapable of multi-tasking?  I've made the best life possible for my family and I WHILE fighting and "crying" racism when it comes the negative, crippling impact it has on my race (yes I'm black ).  Both approaches have served me well.  To simply "suck it up" without pointing it out is simply an idiotic way to deal with it.  No other injustice faced in the world has been solved by silence, so why the fuck would dealing with racism against black people be any different?  Jewish-Americans can use a soapbox to influence US relations with Israel without being criticized for it, but we have to suffer in silence when it comes to domestic oppression?  Get the fuck outta here...

There are a MYRIAD of complex issues faced by Black Americans that are the direct result of subtle and not-so-subtle racism.  Inherited health issues tied to slavery, disproportionate educational opportunities, disparities in the criminal justice system - the list goes on and on and on; And if you aren't Black (not white, not gay, not female, not another minority group) then you really aren't fit to say how we would should deal with those unique challenges or provide commentary about how it affects us.

I know firsthand what it's like to be told "we don't allow your kind here" but that only scratches the damn surface...Racism has morphed and evolved - but it hasn't gone away and its effects are very real.  It still needs to be addressed and it still needs to be rectified.  This is what drives overwhelming racial unity behind a black presidential candidate, not reverse racism.  This becomes plainly obvious once one removes his head from his ass.

finally some honesty. I don't like racism of any sort, including the reverse kind of racism. I am sick and tired of Jews harping about Israel as well. For that matter I have no sympathy for any "group" of people in this country. Nor do I have any intention of paying for crimes that neither myself or my ancestors commited.

I am so sick and fucking tired of listening to how fucking "hard" things are for gays, blacks, jews etc. If you want to see "hard" go to a third world country, they've got it tough, much tougher than anybody of any color in this country could ever imagine.

At least I won't be accusing you of "white guilt" any longer. I don't agree with a bit of what you have to say, but at least you have more a right to voice your opinion on the subject than the typical white bread lib. Just don't expect me to vote for an unfit, unqualfied, ultra liberal, just because he happens to be black.

Arguing that black people overwhelmingly support Obama because he's black leaves out an important element of that motivation to vote for him.  It's because he's black in the midst of overwhelming racism against black people.  If Clearance Thomas were running for president, those numbers wouldn't run quite so high.  

Responding to racism isn't reverse racism.  It's necessary.  The "conditions are worse in other countries so stop complaining" argument is tired and silly.  If you take your car to get the wheels aligned, you want the fucking adjustment REGARDLESS of what type of work the mechanic across the street has to do.  If he tells you he's not going to do the alignment because the other guy has to do replace engines all day, then he's a terrible fucking mechanic.  So if you're  really sick of hearing about how hard it is, write a fucking letter to your congressman.  Boycott something.  Be a COMMUNITY ORGANIZER.  We've been doing that shit for years and have a long way to go.  Being silent about non-consensual, lubeless ass-rape has never served anyone well.    

Beyond the race, argument by the way, McCain is still an idiotic choice.  An administration plagued by mediocre superficial accomplishments and poor decision-making is about the last thing ANY ethnic group needs in this country.  When your criticism of a candidate involves "ulra liberal," there isn't much substance behind it.    

-- Modified on 9/22/2008 10:08:28 AM

-- Modified on 9/22/2008 10:09:47 AM

don't you? Because you are already paying  for the actions of others long dead and buried.

that explanation of some political phenomena is the same as agreeing with it or excusing it. Is there anything I wrote that states that anyone's racism is OK or support for reparations/retribution or that people shouldn't be more self-reliant?

Both parties equally guilty? I don't think so. It was the republican party which pushed the massive deregulation which made the current mess possible and they did so at the behest of their corporate masters. The democrats are certainly not guiltless but they were less willing to throw the middle class to the sharks than were the republicans.

would you still vote Democrat?

in a misguided attempt to apply the principles of Affirmative Action to the mortage business. Affirmative action doesn't work any more than socialism does.

The dems must shoulder their part of the blame for that particular part of the mess but repealing Glass-Steagall, the increased use of the budget deficit, mismanagement of the Fed, and a tax code that is less progressive than before 1988 all have to be laid at the feet of the republicans.

The current crisis in the finance sector is due to the very thing I've been saying is at the root of the entire problem- too much wealth is concentrated at the top. As I said in another post, Adam Smith was right when he identified concentration of power as the enemy of the market. Since 1980, the purpose of the republican party has been to assist those at the top of the economy in consolidating and increasing corporate power while also opposing increased regulation of those corporations.

That has resulted in massive accumulation of wealth by those at the top and the game won't work when too few people have too much money. This is not some kind of envy. I'm plenty comfortable. It has to do with whether we want the game to continue or whether we want to start over with a new game every 75-100 years or so.

I can understand why people might want to go ahead and let this game end and start another one but, unless you're advocating that, it's pretty much impossible not to see the republican policies of the last 28 years as bad for the economy, bad for civil liberties, bad for international relations, bad for the poor, and bad for the middle class. It's been that way for a while now but recently it's started getting bad for people in the bottom of the upper class and the media are starting to actually notice what the poor have been saying for many years and the middle class for a few years. The economy is pretty much broken.

Of course, it may be that my good friend was right when he said that there's nothing wrong with America that a good old fashioned depression won't fix. Maybe the republicans are looking out for all of us by going ahead and making that possible.

I don't vote along party lines, so I can't tell you what I'd do in the case of some generic white woman running for president in some generic period of time on the democratic ticket.  It'll have to happen.  When it does, get back to me.

-- Modified on 9/22/2008 2:29:51 PM

By your us against them line of reasoning, it should be perfectly acceptable for a white person to vote for McCain simply because he is white. The reasoning being that McCain would continue the oppression of people of color to the betterment of white people which would benefit that white voter. Of course that would be racist, but voting for a black person because black people are the victims of "overwhelming racism" is OK. BULLSHIT, even you must get how absurd that sounds.

FYI Obama is an "ultra lib" by almost anyone's but the most left wing partisan's definition. and criticism of an ultra lib is well deserved. Ultra libs are every bit as dangerous for this country as the "ultra right, religious nut jobs" are. There is plenty of substance behind both critcisms.

This economy is far from broken, do you even remember 1980? Double digit inflation, double digit unemployment, interest rates in excess of 20%, are these the good old days that you want to return to?

This current crisis was brougt on by Government meddling in matters of business. The pressure that was put on lenders to make bad loans for the purpose of "helping" minorities and poor people has finally caught up to us.

A black person voting for a black candidate in the midst of overwhelming racism is bullshit?  LOL.  What the fuck else would you expect to happen?  What would be the RIGHT way to deal with the situation, in your opinion?  Ignore the potential progress and vote McCain just to avoid the criticism? Your comparison is consistent with your "stop complaining about racism and it'll just go away" theory, though.  Being dismissive of a significant segment of the population's concerns is what creates an "us against them" climate in this country; not that segment of the population's desire to see itself FINALLY represented in government.  

If you really believe most of the shit you typed you are TERRIBLY misguided.

You just vote for the black guy. Why the fuck am I even talking to you?

At least the white hypocrites TRY to act like Obama is the best choice, you aren't a hypocrite, but YOU are the racist.

I couldn't care less what fucking color Obama is, He is an unqualified, unfit, appeasing socialist that advocates wealth redistribution. That's why I am not voting for him, not because he is black.

Now I am even more pissed TYVM. lol

Do you go blind when certain words pass into your line of vision or are you just playing dumb???  I think I could explain this over and over again, and you would keep saying the same stupid shit when don't have a good retort - it's almost identical to Palin interview.  

Are you saying the Democrats HAVEN'T been representing the black segment?

It was Clinton that signed the bill repealing the Act. There's plenty of blame in government but you need to be honest. You can't let the Dems off the hook so easily. Look up Rubin's part in this and who he went to work for after he left Treasury.

Because you know a lot of people are going to say just that because of his "racist" support from Blacks. It means a lot of resentment from Whites and possibly even rebellion, since Obama's presidency will start in the midst of a bad economy. This argument is about what constitutes a tainted election.

But let's forget the consequences and look at the morality. With your standard, Blacks could never cooperate to better their lot without becoming de facto racists. Why help only impoverished Black people and not White people? They could never protest the injustice of a Black man getting shot 88 times by police for brandishing a lollipop threateningly. Not only can't they accept that they're getting a raw deal, but the very act of defending themselves becomes "racist."

This is not how other ethnic groups advanced. Nobody expected the Irish not to cooperate to get out of poverty. Nobody expected the Jews from Polland and the Ukraine not to cooperated. Meanwhile, nobody was called racist for not forgiving the WASPS and embracing them. At least people then knew they were fucking the Irish. White people today don't seem to know the Blacks are getting screwed and call the Blacks racist for defending themselves.  

JFK attracted the Catholic and Irish votes in comparable numbers to what Obama is doing with the Black votes. Those Catholics and Irish were plainly racists by your definition.

I don't see how compensation or guilt has anything to do with this subject, which is whether the racist divide with Obama will lead to a tainted election. Apparently, they are  circuited issues with you. Talk racism, and you're worried about someone grabbing for your wallet.

It's funny you go there. Not only doesn't it have little to do with this subject, but it won't happen. Ever. It's a laugh. Maybe people are a little messed up in their thinking about race and racism, but even so they are not going to "accidentally" ascent to a morality that immediately takes money away from them. Some Blacks might talk about it, but it can't go further. They're just racking up words.

If there were even a chance in Hell for compensation, it might alleviate racial tensions somewhat in the short-term, but it won't get to the heart of it, since its the racism in the here and now which keeps Blacks in the generally shameful conditions they are in.

Really, yes, people are confused about racism. I wrote, because the idea came to me, it clarified the issue for me that was long causing confusion, and so I thought I should present it here as an different way to see the issue      

-- Modified on 9/23/2008 3:13:05 PM