I like how they mention the Dan Quayle thing twice.

Sort a Dan Quayle thing to do, wasn't it:orly:?

Not to disrupt the current flow of conversation, but I really enjoyed looking at this photostream on Flickr that offers a behind-the-scenes look of the Obama family on Election Night: Election Night 11-04-08 - a set on Flickr

Thank you for sharing these, Snowy. They are all beautiful photos, but there is one of Obama hugging his daughter Malia close, on stage, and it is just a gorgeous moment. Whatever his legacy as president ends up being (though I'm quite willing to bet that it will be a great one), I have no doubt in my mind that this, right here, is a good man who loves his family dearly. And I don't take that for granted in the lives of our presidents, or anyone, really. How refreshing it is to see this.

the photoset was a good find. mindyou try going through all the sets - there seems to be eleventy billion up there but it is nice to see the human side to someone who will be running the world. odd to see him and his wife holding hands yet sitting on the opposite side of the couch...

Eh, are you sure that wasn't his mother-in-law? I remember one photo of him holding hands with her, across the couch...

Yes, I do believe the photo lotsofmagnets is referring to is Obama holding his MIL's hand.

I'm glad others appreciated it; I think the photos offer a rare glimpse of the Obamas as a family in a more private setting, and I liked being able to see the family's reaction to the news. I noticed they chose to watch NBC! :)

You're right. White people are so inherently different that they cannot make an objective decision about race.

We should let Jesse Jackson decide, a man who would call racism if a white dog refused to sniff a black dog's anus. He has a vested interest in seeing equality, right? I'm sure he's waiting for that day so he can finally retire and enjoy his millions.

it's more like: the group that historically fucked over another group of people isn't qualified to tell the group who's been fucked over that they've been made up to. Try it with your girlfriend sometime, piss her off and then announce that you're tired of apologizing and you've done enough. see how far that gets you....

timalkin, you occur to me as being a particularly angry individual.

:bowdown:

Because I'm not a liberal apologist?

I believe in absolute equality of all races, all of the time. I don't understand why that is such a hard pill to swallow. I have never owned slaves, and I don't know anybody who owns slaves or ever has. Slavery sucked, but it happened a long time ago and not to anybody living today.

When I see a black person, I don't see a color. I see a human being that bleeds red, just like I do. I'm forced to see a black person's color because a lot of people make it a huge issue.

It's a never-ending cycle. If you don't like giving a racial group certain privileges, you're labeled as a racist. If you like giving a racial group certain privileges, you're encouraging more and more importance to be placed on a genetic trait that means nothing.

I don't care that our President-elect is black, just like I don't care that he's Christian, has two kids, or likes to play basketball. All that should matter is whether he can do the job.

It doesn't matter to you that this is false? That minorities are manifestly less well off in the United States than white males? It's all well and good to claim that you believe in equality; it's less good if you believe unequal groups are already equal, such that we have no obligation to help them.

but history's a bitch, ain't it?
you are a historical product who operates in an ideological environment that enables you, as one of your historically-specific features, to pretend to yourself that history does not matter because, as you so daintily put it:

but you can't make history go away simply by hiding from it----whether consciously or through ignorance, it hardly matters---it stays where it is despite your wish that you could find a level of being so superficial as to not have it weigh on you--and because it doesn't go away, history becomes yet another persecuting Other, and the Victim is not the folk who were objectively fucked over--and not just by slavery, but by reconstruction, by an entire system and/or culture built on the basis of reconstruction, which was only gradually undermined across the 1950s and 1960s---and which persists today in more dimensions that you would care to think about---rather *you* become the ultimate victim of history, the poor petit bourgeois who wants nothing more than to exist in a tiny sliver of reality and be left alone, but who just can't do it because, no matter how hard he (typically he) tries, the past just won't go away.

it is amazing to me that this shallower than shallow view of the world ever got any traction, and i look forward to the day when it finally returns to the jurassic park of reactionary ideologies that is the vast American Backwater whence it came.

timalkin... if you believe that racism is a minority group celebrating the extraordinary achievement of one of its own is racism....you dont dont understand racism.

If you believe that giving discriminated against minority groups "certain privileges" when it fact what is attempted to be given and achieved is equal access....you dont understand racism.

Gee, I guess it's mighty nice of white folks to lend a helping hand, because of course a black person couldn't succeed without it.

What would black people do without white people there to help them out? Good thing whites allowed President-elect Obama to run for the job. He better not disappoint them, or else white people won't allow any other non-whites to run in the future.

Do you care that, that despite recent achievements, blacks are still discriminated against in employment, education, housing, health care.......for no other reason than the color of their skin?

No, because you actually come across sounding extraordinarily angry. Your tone and attitude come through quite clearly in the language you use.
rb, excellent post. One of your best, in my opinion. :thumbsup:

You don't seem to think that a black racist can exist.

From dictionary.com:

rac⋅ism   /ˈreɪsɪzəm/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [rey-siz-uhm] Show IPA Pronunciation

–noun 1. a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others.
2. a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.
3. hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.

My definition seems to have support. White people giving special privileges to black people is a type of racism. It implies that black people are so inherently inferior that they can't produce significant achievements on their own.

Sadly, we live in different Americas....if you cant see that your numbers 1 and 2 still exist in our white dominated society...both at an in institutional level and individual level.

Correcting those inequalities is not a "special privilege to black people."

Black people had been rendered inferior many years ago. I'm sure you're aware of the history. Unfortunately, the day the slaves were emancipated, they're weren't admitted into the best colleges, nor given any other human rights. These had to be earned, unlike the rights of the white man, and the black man is still working to catch up.

You may know this, intellectually, but you don't seem to want to believe that true equality and racism is still a long, long way off because so many people want to believe what you want to believe.

Hell, look at the idiot in office now. How hard did he work to get where he is? Obama? You can bet your ass he's been working his at least twice as hard in order to prove himself and get to the same place.

If one interprets 1 strictly enough, even acknowledging the existence of racism is racist (which I guess explains timakin's attitude in this thread).

this is a better dictionary definition, from the oed:

there are so many crappy dictionaries.
they are not all the same.

if you interpret the definitions of racism in the way that you are, then it becomes useless as a discussion point. i don't think any of the 'liberal apologists" are saying that black people are 'inherently inferior,' nor would they likely advocate for a government based on that assumption, which is why the conversation is something is creating a whistling affect as we all participate in a conversation which consists of not making points with each other. i would argue that the 'liberal apologists' are arguing that black people are, speaking in short-hand (abaya and raveneye could probably discuss the concepts of race at this point if they wanted), more or less inherently black, but not inherently inferior. thus, historically it is bad that They have been systemically denied equal access, opportunity, etc. that part of the conversation is probably a bit of posthumous equine lashing.

i don't think it's possible that you can really abstract yourself to the point that you truly and completely are unaware of another person's race, anymore than i can. it's ingrained in so many things that occur in your interactions that i don't think this is possible. regardless, i think the original point is that the idea that black americans being happy, proud, excited, whatever - that a black american has finally been elected to the presidency is perfectly normal. as would the excitement on the behalf of women if hillary clinton, and to some extent sarah palin, had been elected to the presidency/presidency-in-waiting. on a base level, it would be like saying that americans wouldn't be excited to see michael phelps win 8 gold medals. or black people (or maybe thai people) being excited about tiger woods winning the pga, or the masters. or the us hockey team in 1980 winning the gold. we naturally form groups, whether we like it or not, and we are excited when a group we belong to gains a level of previously unattained status.

i find your posts, timalkin, to be full of what i consider to be simplifications that tend to understate the historic treatment of blacks in america. no, america did not invent slavery. no, you don't have any direct guilt over slavery. neither do i. but i do recognize that some aspects to my social interaction are governed by the systems in which i exist and attempt to navigate. no one is asking you to feel 'guilty,' but that's a long way from simply recognizing the current political events in their historical perspective and allowing them to be appreciated from a human, and perhaps humane, viewpoint.

exactly what is it that irritates you so much? i don't get it.

A black person has attained what is arguably the most powerful position the world has ever known.

What else do white people need to do in order to "correct the mistakes of the past?" How many more black Presidents, Secretaries of State, Congressmen, Governors, doctors, lawyers, etc. do we need to have before everybody is even?

If not now, when? The answer to that question is "never," based on most of the responses in this thread. If the answer to that question is left up to black people, of course the answer will be "never." Why would they ever give up the privileges that have been bestowed upon them?

Liberal apologists have created a politically-correct monster that will never stop.

One man rising above and becoming President doesn't erase the reality that millions of other Black Americans are still struggling.

this is obscene.
there's a level of ignorance that really is not acceptable--you've found it.

I would argue that point. While the weapons at hand could destroy the earth, there are a helluva lot of safeguards in the way of any ONE person deciding arbitrarily to use them.
Clinton's administration shows how little power a President truly has, if the opposing party is sufficiently motivated to stop them.

As to the apologists, liberal or not, there is A LOT we in the West have to apologize for. Don't you wonder why "Death to America" is on the lips of many? It's not just the power we possess, but rather how we are PERCEIVED to use it. The perception of Obama around the world provides some relief from the economic and political imperialism we've wrought upon the less powerful.

Understanding where the resentments lie, and getting to the root of them, will go far to prevent Sept. 11's from happening again. Won't totally stop them, but will create conditions wherein the terrorists will having a smaller pool to draw from. If we are just, other cultures will police their own extremists to a greater degree than they do today.

Timalkin, your type of thought is the best friend the extremists have.

In my opinion.

Whatever. Everybody knows racism ended with pilot of the Cosby Show.

I would only add that the struggle that millions of persons of color in the US still face is not a result of lack of effort but a result of barriers that still exist.

Those racial barriers may not be as overt as a generation ago, but they exist nonetheless.
-----Added 10/11/2008 at 09 : 45 : 03-----
Unfortunately, its clear that ignorance and intolerance still exists as well.

Great find, Snowy! I especially love the photo of Obama hugging his wife and waving - those smiles are amazing.

He goes a bit far, but there is a shred of truth in what he says. Only a shred, mind you.

Affirmitive action is, in fact, a bad idea. Placing racial quotas on hiring managers is exactly what MLKJr. said his dream foresaw not happening anymore. If you have to hire a certain percentage of minority then you are required to take race into account when hiring people - and that flies in the face of what MLK wanted.

This has actually created problems for government contractors. 30-some years ago when Ben Rich's Skunk Works was building the F-117 stealth fighter, EEO laws required him to hire a certain percentage of his engineers from local ethnic minorities. When grilled as to why he had not complied, he said "None of them went to engineering school."

The consideration when hiring someone should be whether or not they are the most qualified of all the applicants for that job. Once you bring racial quotas into it, you can no longer make that your consideration, and several problems crop up:

What if only white males apply for the job?
What if the minority applicants are genuinely less qualified for the position than the non-minority?
Why the hell are we worrying about race in 2008?

Until we achieve a true colorblind society, which means not only that KKK-esque attitudes of blacks being inferior to whites no longer exist, but also that philosophies dictating that minorities should get points for being a minority no longer exist, we will continue to have a racial divide in this country, whether the "racists" or the "liberal apologists" like it or not.

the american educational system is an example of institutionalized discrimination--on the basis of socio-economic class position. racism and class have been intertwined in the united states for much of it's history.

the reason that affirmative action is as superficial as it is follows from the illusion that racism could be separated from it's having been mapped onto the class structure and could be "addressed" without addressing class.

educational opportunities should be equal for everyone---funding should be flat, not tied to local property taxes. there can be different levels of schools, but access to them should not be tied to the income level of a child's parents. there is no equality of access to education, there is no equality of access to opportunity--what there is instead is an unbelievable waste of human potential.

to my mind, the way educational opportunities are distributed as the direct reflection of the american class order and it's spatial arrangement is a very good example of the kind of arrangement that has to be changed before the united states will come anywhere near what it says it already is.

i support affirmative action because it is better than nothing--but it is also a shallow 60s liberal bit of legislation designed to address symptoms without touching any of the causes. it is better than nothing because, despite its superficiality, it is a recognition of the history that the social order had made, even as it pretends that if you make a gesture and nothing more to address racism you make the rest of it ok.

as an aside, i've long been more sympathetic to malcolm x than to martin luther king.

While I enjoyed the rest of the post, I particularly agree with this part.

I'm reminded of an effort at the University of Texas Law School to increase the number of Hispanic students graduating with JDs. The law school lowered their standards for acceptance for individuals of Hispanic descent (whatever that means). After evaluating the graduation rates after several years, they discovered that graduation rates had not changed for Hispanics. More Hispanic students were accepted, but they graduated at the same rate. This effort was not "better than nothing". Instead of helping students, they saddled many with a year or two of student loans and no degrees to show for it. Like you said, they addressed the symptoms without touching the causes. (They did, however, increase tuition revenue). Somewhere I have a reference...

UT also has the "10% rule". If you graduate in the top ten percent of your high school class, you are guaranteed acceptance to UT if you apply. Another band aid to cover poor primary and secondary education...

I don't interpret the 16th amendment as such. SCOTUS has ruled that Income is defined as "Gains". The have also defined your labor as "an even exchange of goods (money) for services). Hence, you did not "gain" anything from your labor - you evenly exchanged your labor for money. If you take your money and invest it in property or stock, then you can have "gains" on your investment and it is fair game.
-----Added 14/11/2008 at 02 : 28 : 31-----
If this is the case - I would like the NAACP to compensate me for the death of 3 relatives who fought for the Union army to free their people and give Obama this opportunity. I mean, my people certainly didn't "fuck" his people, we helped them immensely - gave our lives doing it. If we are going to repair what we did to them, I think they need to repair the sacrifice my family made too.

Better yet, let's just call it even and move on.
-----Added 14/11/2008 at 02 : 29 : 30-----
Apparently, at least one more...
-----Added 14/11/2008 at 02 : 32 : 40-----
Why is that "my fault" and why do I have to pay for that?

Obama's position in this country is proof positive that the opportunities for any person in America is limitless. I can't make someone take the opportunities available to them.

While certainly not presenting his views in the most polite of manner, I find myself in agreement with timalkin on my opposition to affirmative action for the exact reasons shakran posted.

That doesn't really imply everything else timalkin derives from this, but on that note we are in agreement.

The fact that a discussion over Obama's election turns into a basis for arguing against affirmative action is evidence enough to me that you guys just don't really have much of a clue about what you're talking about...except that you don't like affirmative action. I mean, you seem to have the idea that you're opposed to it locked down fairly tight, but for someone who claims to be "comfortably perched at the top of the bell curve" it'd be interesting to see you muster an argument sans non sequitur in support of your position.

I'm not even sure what you think you're "paying" for? I've certainly never paid anything to a woman or black person. Do you guys even know that the largest group that benefits from affirmative action is white women? I'm simply amazed at the historical trends between women and blacks and who gets their rights first. Who won the right to vote first? I'd have to look up the timeline, since I can't remember whether blacks or women were first to be admitted into universities...given they were white, male only for a good long while. And during this primary season, I was watching to see if the 1st black/woman issue would repeat itself the same way as suffrage...and it did! I was a bit shocked over the lack of dialog about this. It's kind of stunning actually, since Blacks comprise a minority of the population in both the numerical and power sense, whereas women comprise a power minority but a numerical majority of the population.

I wish I could live in your fantasy world, where the effects of slavery ended 100 years ago. If I did, then at least I could make more sense out of the "reparations for civil war casualties" argument. I wonder how many people have this thought rattling around in their minds: if Obama were much darker his life course and ultimately this election would have had a different trajectory. That's not even a stab at whites, that's a fact that even blacks still need to work out among themselves. The fact is, we may get a woman nominee soon, but we'll not see another black candidate for a good long time. If I had to guess, I would suspect we won't elect another black president for 20+ years.

+1

I dont know a lot about his policies (not being American), and Im not actually sure he has many... but I have to say that just listening to his speeches, Obama is not only the most inspirational politician I've ever seen in my life time - I would say he was the only inspirational politician Ive ever known in my lifetime.

On the race issue, one of the people they had on the BBC election coverage said that the first 16 president's of America legally could have owned Barrack Obama as a piece of property. And now he's president elect. I always thought Jesse Jackson was kind of a buffoon - but seeing pictures of Jackson at some rally just standing their crying after the results came in... there must still be many people like him, who lived through a time where blacks and whites were in segragated schools in some states and so on... he could never have imagined he would have lived to see this.