"Hostile postures" aren't about the past, their about the present inequalities.

And how are we supposed to "get over it?" Everytime we have to say, "With liberty and justice for all," know that's a lie? Or sing, "Land of the free. Home of the brave," knowing that's a lie.

And why should we forget? No one asks the Jews to forget the first Passover. I don't recall anyone asking Italians and Irish to "get over it."

And, we all know why. It's because Jews, Italians, and the Irish have successfully assimilated into American whiteness. Cause, they can like anglo and for the most part, their color of the skin isn't a disadvantage for them in America's social market.

But, brown skin is something that can't be assimilated. And it hard to get over those things that haven't changed. It's not black history that's on our collective minds, it's black present.

Posted at June 28, 2008 3:02 PM in response to The African American Patriotism Quandary

Thanks for the clarification.

Posted at June 13, 2008 9:56 PM in response to Will White Feminists Speak up for Michelle Obama?

He asked for an example and I gave him one. Chill out. Yes, I said, "Chill out."

I don't watch Fox, so no I didn't send them a letter. I'm not a big CNN fan anyway, so I didn't send them a letter.

I agreed that it seemed like the Clinton were just "prostituting" Chelsea. She's a grown woman. Why can't she talk to reporters? Personally, I wouldn't have used the word "pimp" on air, but I agreed with Shuster's assessment. I also agreed that she was behaving in a small, petty, nasty manner - she-devil. Though, I wouldn't have used "she-devil," just small, petty, and nasty.

I was mostly disturbed by the comments about her voice and laugh. Other than that, I gave some people, including Christ Matthews some slack. Christ Matthews treats his female guests with the upmost respect - especially since he's stopped commenting on how attractive they are. And I cut folks some slack if they used gendered langauge to criticize something that is bad about Clinton's campaign. With the exception of the b-word and c-word, lots of English adjectives are gendered in a way that doesn't discriminate against women.

Now, I'll ask you. Where was all this righteous indignation with Pat Buchanan and Fox spewing all kinds of racist ignorance? Most importantly, where was all this indignation when the Clinton campaign played on mainstream racism? I don't recall Obama using sexism to his advantage. Do you?

So, again. He asked for an example. I gave him one. Chill out.

Posted at June 13, 2008 5:26 PM in response to Will White Feminists Speak up for Michelle Obama?

The party isn't predominantly African American.

I'm not denying "identity politics," per se. I'm just saying that it's more complicated than simply "voting for the black guy." It's about racial justice and equality. It's about equality of opportunity. It's about voting for the person who most likely knows and shares my concerns and interests.

Further, I can sympathize with white blue-collar voters wanting to vote for someone who bowls and goes to the bar before heading home. I just know that in the end, it's about actual policies not identity. So, for example, if Obama had sounded more like Pat Buchanan on issues of race and Clinton sounded more like Rev. Wright, she would've gotten substantially more of the black vote, possibly even winning the black vote.

And from what I can tell of you personally, you're not voting identity. Not everyone does. And it's exceptionally rare that black folks get to vote identity in nation/state wide elections.

Did I answer your questions? Heretofore, I've actually liked you, so I'm sincerely trying to answer your questions.

Posted at June 13, 2008 5:20 PM in response to Frank Furedi on Barack Obama and the psychologization of politics

I think another way to have put it would've been to say that minorities aren't the only ones who play "identity" politics.

Don't get me wrong. As an African American, I understand the expectation that someone like you, be they female or a racial minority or a member of the LGBT community, will best represent and protect your interests. But, I think extending "identity" to the person you'd like to have a beer with, or the person who hunts is just stupid. Take it from me, African Americans will vote for a white person who's good on equality before voting for a person of color who's not. It hard for me to take seriously someone's need to vote for the person they'd like to have beer with over the person who supports a tax code that'll allow them to buy more beer.

Maybe instead of going bowling, to ensure the white blue-collar vote, Obama should say, "I can't bowl, but with my healthcare plan, you'll be able to go bowling more often."

Ok, yes, I'm being corny, but I hope you get my point. I agree with Furedi for the most part, but I think the differences between McCain and Obama are stark enough to override the psychologization of politics.

Posted at June 13, 2008 12:41 AM in response to Frank Furedi on Barack Obama and the psychologization of politics

How about Fox describing her as Barack's "baby mama," which, in this case, is both racist and sexist.

Posted at June 13, 2008 12:18 AM in response to Will White Feminists Speak up for Michelle Obama?

It could be that is doesn't hold water cause that's not what I said.

She's making fun of white people's paranoia of Obama's "blackness" because their paranoia is unfounded. That makes it funny.

If the cases were reversed, studies have proven that African Americans should be paranoid. So to make fun of black people's paranoia isn't funny and it amounts to enjoying/celebrating the status-quo which would be racist.

What you're referring to is an issue of the institutional power differential, and it's a case I could make. But it's not the case I was making.

Posted at June 12, 2008 7:55 PM in response to Getting Whitey: Michelle Obama's Secret Negro Agenda

This whole Daddy party vs Mommy party is interesting when you think of security. First, there's the practical matters of who usually takes the child to the doctor, who kisses the "boo boo," who the child calls out to after a nightmare, etc and so on. In the majority of households, the answer to all these questions is Mommy.

And not to downplay the power of testerone. But have you ever seen a woman after her child's been attacked? I know one lady who jumped into a fight with her son and the two of them fought his attacker. The notion that women aren't strong enough to protect America is patently false. And what's more is that this whole notion that Daddy is a better protecter than Mommy has to do with the sexist notion of what's proper and acceptable for women and what's not.

Posted at June 12, 2008 7:49 PM in response to Security From What?

"Unfortunately if a white person were to take this post and change the "whitey" references to any derogatory word for a minority, even if they were joking, they'd be crucified."

That's because their "joke" would be historically and factually unfunny. White Americans don't have anything to avenge African Americans about. Not even affirmative action.

Posted at June 12, 2008 5:41 PM in response to Getting Whitey: Michelle Obama's Secret Negro Agenda

I agree. I hope Obama makes voter education part of his campaign, but I also think it's unfair to leave it up to him. You know?

Posted at June 11, 2008 9:04 PM in response to "I don't want to redistribute the wealth" by John McCain