Deleted

[KBecks]

No, what I am saying is that it would be no more historic than having a WOMAN as Vice President. There is this big deal about "Our First Black President", but nothing about "Our First Female VP". It has nothing to do with slave history, etc. It doesn't make sense. He's 50% WHITE as well. The blacks want to identify with him, but he wasn't even raised in the same type of environment as many of the blacks who are voting for him and identifying with him.

I just don't think skin color should determine a president and I don't see how it is so "historic" if he is elected, but it's not a big deal if Palin becomes VP. That's all I'm saying.

The spin is there about it being so special so people change votes to Obama to make history, which is IMO garbage. Voting because of skin color ot gender is wrong.

[LarsMal]

What I find interesting is that Obama (from what I have seen/heard) has never focused on being black as a campaigning strategy. Others (media, surrogates, etc.) have pointed it out, but I have never seen a stump speech or anything of the likes where Obama has said, "Vote for me because I am black." He has mentioned it is a "historic" race, both in the primaries and in this race, but I have always felt that he has tried to stay away from his "blackness". Historic for both women and African-Americans.

Whenever he does talk about race, he mentions his white mother and African father. I think he identifies himself as African-American because of the actual color of his skin, but as others have pointed out, he was raised in Hawaii, by white family. I don't think he has tried to sell his race to anyone. Others, yes, but Obama himself, not that I have seen.

If anything, I feel like he has (strategically) put himself out there with more white people (in a lot of the ads I've seen) to try to reach out to white voters who might be hesitant about voting for a black man.

JMO!

[citymama]

It doesn't make sense. He's 50% WHITE as well.

I just don't think skin color should determine a president and I don't see how it is so "historic" if he is elected, but it's not a big deal if Palin becomes VP. That's all I'm saying.

Wow, that is a pretty wild statement. Think about it again for a minute.

I agree, skin color has nothing to do with being a President (or anything else)- but unfortunately, we may say that in theory, but act differently in practice - usually to the disadvantage of the darker-skinned person. 19% of Dem. primary voters in PA acknowledged that they did not vote for Obama because he is black. Whatever white, brown, grey ancestry he may have is not perceived by these voters, or by many people who look at him. They see him as black.

This is true for African Americans all over the country - no matter what other racial backgrounds, people view them as black. And usually, it's not to the advantage - usually it conjures up negative prejudices. Many African Americans also judge light skinned African Americans as not being "black" enough.

I think Colin Powell said it best when he described Obama as a "transformational" candidate - I think of him as someone who transcends typical divisions of race and ethnicity in a way that could be very healing and positive for this country.

[MamaMolly]

I have to disagree. If this were the case Jessie Jackson would have either been president, or would have come a LOT closer, as he is black (or African American, if you prefer) and has run for president.

I also agree with the comment about Ferraro already having BTDT for the female VP nomination so only if McCain/Palin win would it truly be historic, technically speaking.

And just to throw some gasoline on the flame me fire my outrageous bigot of an uncle isn't against Obama because of his skin color, but because my uncle is convinced that Obama is a Muslim. Or so he says. But then this is a man who is not playing with a full deck, and no amount of reasoning or even tangible proof to the contrary would convince him otherwise.

All that to say that there are just as many reasons to vote for a person (skin, looks ~it played a role when Kennedy won!, religion, what ever) as there are to not vote for someone. And I really don't care who you vote for or why...
...just as long as you VOTE!

[Moneypenny]

Obama is identified as black because it is a large voting block. His wife is black, and it works for him to identify as black.

What do you mean by "it works for him to identify as black"?

[ellies mom]

Yeah, I told my black husband this and he feels you are totally full of it. It is pretty offensive that you are clearly voting for McCain because of his policies and position on issues but my husband voted for Obama purely because of the color of his skin. Give me a flippin' break.

[KBecks]

What do you mean by "it works for him to identify as black"?

It is politically advantageous for him to identify as black, to marry a black woman, and to belong to a black mega-church in Chicago. All those things score points with black voters.

I think the person who said that Obama is not positioned as mixed-race is right --- Obama saying he is mixed race is a net negative -- it doesn't score points with whites or blacks, but distances himself from both groups. He identifies as black by his connections in his marriage and in his church selection.

Not that he doesn't love Michelle or his church, but it would be a different picture of him if he married a white person and attended a white mega-church. Would he still be identified as black or as strongly connected to black voters? I doubt it. He chose the community where he would naturally get the most support, which makes a lot of sense. Knowing he may want a political career, or even just choosing the personal path of least resistance, the black community would probably be more comfortable.

Black voters are very loyal to the Democratic party though, so it may not matter much..... but in his earlier career, when he was becoming a known politician and community leader among others within the party, it probably mattered more and it mattered that he self identifies with the black community.

ETA: I think of some comedy skit I saw where people are calling dibs on who's black -- is Tiger Woods black? and they ran down a bunch of people as to who is "black" and who is "white". Kind of funny and stupid but, kind of true.

[ThreeofUs]

I am 1/16 or 1/32 descendant of a Mississippi freed slave.... *snip* It's not one drop, it's just appearance.

I'm 1/16 AmerIndian; this actually qualifies me to be a tribal member, should I wish to claim that part of my ancestry. (I still find that fact amazing.) This is a bit odd, as I would not say I'm Irish (and I'm more Irish than AI by ancestry).

This used to be a social stigma, at the same time that "one drop" of any "colored" blood made someone less socially acceptable (at least in the South).

Now it's just interesting history. I like being a mix of a lot of different types of people. Maybe I could be reincarnated as a calico cat?

[LarsMal]

ETA: I think of some comedy skit I saw where people are calling dibs on who's black -- is Tiger Woods black? and they ran down a bunch of people as to who is "black" and who is "white". Kind of funny and stupid but, kind of true.

Tiger Woods is married to a white woman, but I still consider him black (but that is besides the point!).

I was just curious if you were suggesting that Obama married Michelle *because* she is black? I think that would be making a pretty big assumption. I haven't read his books, but DH has, and I remember either DH or someone else mentioning that he dated white women as well as black women. I would like to think he married Michelle because he LOVES her and saw a future with her, not just because she is black and would help his political career.

[stella]

While this topic is interesting, I am astounded to see so many people announcing the motivations of people they don't even know.

I can't imagine speaking in such generalizations - and expecting to be taken seriously.