The Democratic Party is a Racist Haven

[Anonymous]

Language is determined by popular use, and in America, the traditional definition of black is that at least one parent is (known to be) black. That trickles down through the generations to mean that at least one ancestor is ... I am not claiming any logical, scientific, or even rational, basis for that usage, but it is the reality of our country.

There is a less clear meaning for the word racism. To most liberals it involves actions against a person because of perceived race. To many conservatives it appears to include actions intended to redress these, or even, as Colbert lampoons, just being aware of race.

Historically the Democratic Party was the home of southern racists, but as was pointed out a few postings ago, they moved to the GOP in the Johnson/Nixon years. Both parties have policies that have racial overtones, but I (with an admitted liberal slant) cannot see equality between policies intended to help the disadvantaged and policies intended to attract the prejudiced.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's not the race - get it right. It's the fact that B. Hussein Obama was a dog-eating muslim from Indonesia, okay? Yes, it is okay for that to factor into a voting decision.

You are quite right in the sense that the Constitution does not require that a citizen's vote be rational. You have a right to vote as you see fit. That you do not also take advantage of your right to keep your reasons to yourself, rather than convince those of us who waste our time reading your ramblings that you are an ass, puzzles me. Since you are anonymous, I suppose you do yourself no harm. But I doubt you are so stupid that you believe you are moving anyone to vote against Obama because of what his stepfather put on the table when he was four years old, so I half suspect you are a liberal like me, whose sense of humor is even more perverse than mine. Are you the DCUM Colbert?

[Anonymous]

He did eat a dog...which is not cool.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:He did eat a dog...which is not cool.

No, he ate dog meat. He did not, as your wording implies, grab a living dog, tear it apart, and eat its flesh. I don't claim that either is "cool", but the latter would at least be newsworthy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:He did eat a dog...which is not cool.

To you. If you only showed such concern for humans, you would be a much better person.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If Obama is African american so is she

Yes this is part of the problem with the term African-American. I use it because it's important to many people in that community to use it but it doesn't really make sense in many respects. I prefer Black and White - because while that de-emphasizes culture, it's also true that people are often judged on their physical traits.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If Obama is African american so is she

Yes this is part of the problem with the term African-American. I use it because it's important to many people in that community to use it but it doesn't really make sense in many respects. I prefer Black and White - because while that de-emphasizes culture, it's also true that people are often judged on their physical traits.

I did not realize she had become an American citizen. And also retained her South African citizenship, so she is truly African-American. And a citizen of two USA's.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If Obama is African american so is she

Yes this is part of the problem with the term African-American. I use it because it's important to many people in that community to use it but it doesn't really make sense in many respects. I prefer Black and White - because while that de-emphasizes culture, it's also true that people are often judged on their physical traits.

It's not a problem, because she does not call herself African American.

I also find it funny that the posters who are tickled about claiming she is AA are also the ones who will beat up apparently white Democrats like Elizabeth Warren for claiming Native American status due to actual blood lineage. At least pick an internally consistent position. Trying to have it both ways makes you look weak.

[Anonymous]

Uh, Theron can claim technically to be African-American if she so desired because she was born and raised (I assume) on the continent of Africa. I was pointing out that that's why that term makes no sense overall. If we are going by continent of origin, what do we call her? European-American because somewhere down the line her ancestors immigrated from Europe? Just call her White.

And, sorry, I lost respect for Elizabeth Warren when I heard she had laid claim to the fraction of Indian heritage she has. I'm tired of white people romanticizing American Indians this way - especially when she seems to have claimed some kind of mixed racial status that she doesn't really experience in her daily life or her identity.

I'm a left-liberal myself and like her politics but I was deeply disappointed by this. To me it shows lack of respect for what people of another race/ethnicity have been through.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Uh, Theron can claim technically to be African-American if she so desired because she was born and raised (I assume) on the continent of Africa. I was pointing out that that's why that term makes no sense overall. If we are going by continent of origin, what do we call her? European-American because somewhere down the line her ancestors immigrated from Europe? Just call her White.

And, sorry, I lost respect for Elizabeth Warren when I heard she had laid claim to the fraction of Indian heritage she has. I'm tired of white people romanticizing American Indians this way - especially when she seems to have claimed some kind of mixed racial status that she doesn't really experience in her daily life or her identity.

I'm a left-liberal myself and like her politics but I was deeply disappointed by this. To me it shows lack of respect for what people of another race/ethnicity have been through.

OMG how many times to we have to go through this? AA is a designation of identity. It means you are what you call yourself based on how society perceives you. The irony is that you clearly understand this, because you wrote the very thing in the bolded sentence above.

If you know this, then you don't have to be confused about the meaning of AA. Charlize Theron will never be AA because she does not experience life as an AA. She does not call herself AA. My Italian ancestors called themselves Italian-Ameican, and that's what the rest of America thought of them when they got here. Is that label meaningful in my generation? No, its relevance is limited to discussion about family traditions and religion.

This is not hard. If you use common sense, you will be surprisingly accurate at the AA designation. There will be the rare exception. But it won't be Charlize Theron.

[Anonymous]

All modern humans are a descendants of people who lived in Africa very recently. The differences that people notice such as pigmentation of skin, type of hair, eye color, limb length etc. are surface features that have been selected for in the environment. When you examine the underlying level of genetic variation, we are all much more similar than different. There is no genetic test that can prove race. It is simply a cultural construct.

[Anonymous]

Elizabeth warren is mentally unstable. It's like when Hillary said she was named after sir Edmond Hillary and got caught. Hillary also got caught saying she was caught in gunfire in Afghanistan and got caught. The sad thing is, they are so mentally damaged, I think they actually believe they are elling the truth. Liberalism is symptomatic of a mental disease.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:Elizabeth warren is mentally unstable. It's like when Hillary said she was named after sir Edmond Hillary and got caught. Hillary also got caught saying she was caught in gunfire in Afghanistan and got caught. The sad thing is, they are so mentally damaged, I think they actually believe they are elling the truth. Liberalism is symptomatic of a mental disease.

Yes, and Mitt Romney represents the paragon of honestly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The sad thing is, they are so mentally damaged, I think they actually believe they are elling the truth.

I think that could have described about half of the Republican field. I'd say it about Romney, but he knows he's lying.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Uh, Theron can claim technically to be African-American if she so desired because she was born and raised (I assume) on the continent of Africa. I was pointing out that that's why that term makes no sense overall. If we are going by continent of origin, what do we call her? European-American because somewhere down the line her ancestors immigrated from Europe? Just call her White.

And, sorry, I lost respect for Elizabeth Warren when I heard she had laid claim to the fraction of Indian heritage she has. I'm tired of white people romanticizing American Indians this way - especially when she seems to have claimed some kind of mixed racial status that she doesn't really experience in her daily life or her identity.

I'm a left-liberal myself and like her politics but I was deeply disappointed by this. To me it shows lack of respect for what people of another race/ethnicity have been through.

OMG how many times to we have to go through this? AA is a designation of identity. It means you are what you call yourself based on how society perceives you. The irony is that you clearly understand this, because you wrote the very thing in the bolded sentence above.

If you know this, then you don't have to be confused about the meaning of AA. Charlize Theron will never be AA because she does not experience life as an AA. She does not call herself AA. My Italian ancestors called themselves Italian-Ameican, and that's what the rest of America thought of them when they got here. Is that label meaningful in my generation? No, its relevance is limited to discussion about family traditions and religion.

This is not hard. If you use common sense, you will be surprisingly accurate at the AA designation. There will be the rare exception. But it won't be Charlize Theron.

I'm not confused. I'm arguing that as a category used to describe a whole group of people, it has limitations. I would prefer "Black" over African-American and "White" over European-American (and please, please don't get me started on the use of "Caucasian," which is completely incoherent).

For example, light-skinned people from the Middle East and North Africa experience prejudice in the United States because of their ethnicity and religion but when they walk down the street in Western dress they benefit from White privilege because they are assumed to be White by people who see them. And, like the Irish, who were once considered a separate race from the English, they are most likely only a few generations away from being accepted as White. But they are not by any stretch of the imagination, European-American. What they benefit from is the cultural assumptions in the United States about people who have that skin color.

But, as many people want to be called African-American, I'm happy to use that term - especially because it's a matter of respecting someone's identity as they see it. But I'm not going to pretend it's not problematic as a social science category.