You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #39: I agree with you, but for different reasons. [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
smalll Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-08-08 07:27 PM
Response to Original message
39. I agree with you, but for different reasons.
Obama can claim to be black because of the Taxi Test. It's also true that most African-Americans have "white" blood in them, so I wouldn't say he's not black because his mother is caucasian.

However, his blackness comes from a father who was NOT what we call an "African-American." African-Americans were brought over to this country in slave ships in the 1600s and 1700s, at the beginning of this nation's history; Obama's father was a Kenyan who flew over here on an airplane of his own free will in the 20th century. Thus, Obama has no real connection to the history and legacy of African-Americans.

Also, Obama's father was an East African; African-Americans' forbears came from West Africa: East Africans (like Obama) tend to be taller, thinner and more long-faced than West Africans.

Obama knows this: remember Obama's Iowa victory speech, how it began? He said, to an ecstatic crowd of supporters: "You know, they said this day would never come. They said our sights were set too high. They said this country was too divided, too disillusioned ..." How would you expect that sentence to be completed? And when that caucasian Iowa crowd cheered, what were they really cheering for at that moment? The idea that "They said ... a black man could never win here." But Obama knows he can't say that. So instead, he completed the sentence thusly: "to ever come together around a common purpose." Essentially, this was a nonsensical, content-free conclusion. "To ever come together around a common purpose"??? Whoever had won Iowa, surely it was because a plurality of voters would "come together around a common purpose" to vote for Obama, or Clinton, or Edwards, or anyone else.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC