Beyond race: The real “No Labels” movement
President Obama was supposed to be the first post-racial president.
But as you know, the post-racial era was over before it began.
It’s been left to a generation of multiracial students to pick up the torch. And they’re putting the president to shame.
Via the NYTimes:
Many young adults of mixed backgrounds are rejecting the color lines that have defined Americans for generations in favor of a much more fluid sense of identity. Ask Michelle López-Mullins, a 20-year-old junior and the president of the Multiracial and Biracial Student Association, how she marks her race on forms like the census, and she says, “It depends on the day, and it depends on the options.”
They are also using the strength in their growing numbers to affirm roots that were once portrayed as tragic or pitiable.
“I think it’s really important to acknowledge who you are and everything that makes you that,” said Ms. [Laura] Wood, the 19-year-old vice president of the group. “If someone tries to call me black I say, ‘yes — and white.’ People have the right not to acknowledge everything, but don’t do it because society tells you that you can’t.”
…Over dinner with Ms. López-Mullins one night, she wondered: “What if Obama had checked white? There would have been an uproar because he’s the first ‘black president,’ even though he’s mixed. I would like to have a conversation with him about why he did that.”
Absent that opportunity, Ms. Wood took her concerns about what Mr. Obama checked to a meeting of the campus chapter of the N.A.A.C.P. last year. Vicky Key, a past president of the Multiracial and Biracial Student Association, who is Greek and black, joined her. The question for discussion was whether Mr. Obama is the first black president or the first multiracial president.
Ms. Key, a senior, remembered someone answering the question without much discussion: “One-drop rule, he’s black.”
“But we were like, ‘Wait!’ ” she said. “That’s offensive to us. We sat there and tried to advocate, but they said, ‘No, he’s black and that’s it.’ Then someone said, ‘Stop taking away our black president.’ I didn’t understand where they were coming from, and they didn’t understand me.”
Whether Mr. Obama is considered black or multiracial, there is a wider debate among mixed-race people about what the long-term goals of their advocacy should be, both on campus and off.
“I don’t want a color-blind society at all,” Ms. Wood said. “I just want both my races to be acknowledged.”
Ms. López-Mullins countered, “I want mine not to matter.”
And the boxes.
And the color-coded congressional caucuses.
This is the real “No Labels” movement. For the sake of my Filipino-Spanish-Russian-Hungarian all-American children, may it flourish.
***
Flashback: The real leading agent of post-racial hope and change….Ward Connerly.
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
 |
Who’s funding Brett Kimberlin?
May 25, 2012 01:52 PM by Michelle Malkin
22 CommentsObama’s Land of the LOST
May 25, 2012 01:42 PM by Michelle Malkin
37 CommentsObama’s latest campaign angle: I’ve been saving America from wild Republican debts
May 24, 2012 04:33 PM by Doug Powers
48 Comments
Senate finally passes a budget approves bill striking word ‘lunatic’ from federal law
May 24, 2012 11:22 AM by Doug Powers
193 CommentsStammertime: Jay Carney asked if Chicago protests have soured Obama’s support for OWS
May 23, 2012 07:44 PM by Doug Powers
54 Comments
S.E. Cupp, Hustler, and the four stages of conservative female abuse
May 23, 2012 02:13 PM by Michelle Malkin
142 CommentsPig Maher’s boy Bill Burton mocks my support of Hatch challenger Dan Liljenquist
May 23, 2012 11:37 AM by Michelle Malkin
32 CommentsFree speech blogburst: Show solidarity for targeted conservative bloggers; Update: It’s Everybody Blog About Brett Kimberlin Day; Donation fund for targets
May 23, 2012 05:59 AM by Michelle Malkin
110 Comments
Jaczko the Jerk: Harry Reid’s sexist crony gets the boot
May 23, 2012 05:15 AM by Michelle Malkin
31 Comments
Categories: Politics,Race relations
Babalu Blog
» U.S. Manned Space Flight in The 21st CenturyVillainous Company
» Must Read Post of the Day. Possibly, the YearRedstate
» Kimberlin’s Associates Caught on Tape?
You know it will get silly when my dog is called a Canine-American or Beagle-American. Agreed. Enough already.
As Ken Hamblin wrote many years ago:
As I’ve posted before, listen to Morgan Freeman on the issue of race. Makes sense to me.
I was born here and I check Native American – I have not heard anything negative– yet.
***
The Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. had the correct vision of what America’s racial future should be. Respect for each other, and fair equal treatment for all.
***
But most of our current political leaders are using race and ethnicity to divide and conquer in elections. Race hustlers, self serving corrupt politicians, etc..
***
I think Martin Luther King had God’s vision. But he was a real minister–not a charlatan.
***
John Bibb
***
Being an American is a Blessing. Thank God for Liberty and Freedom!
I am a mix of German, Welch, Dutch, and English. Possibly, a little Cherokee Indian, but that isn’t confirmed. My children are also half-Chinese.
But,they and I were born here, so we’re all-American.
I just put down Mutt…
or sometimes…. RACE: Human
That’ll keep progressive racialists up at night with worry.
I’m partial to answering the “race” question as “human”, since American is not a race. The concepts of “race” and “American” are antithetical.
“There is no room in this country for hyphenated Americanism. When I refer to hyphenated Americans, I do not refer to naturalized Americans. Some of the very best Americans I have ever known were naturalized Americans, Americans born abroad. But a hyphenated American is not an American at all… The one absolutely certain way of bringing this nation to ruin, of preventing all possibility of its continuing to be a nation at all, would be to permit it to become a tangle of squabbling nationalities, an intricate knot of German-Americans, Irish-Americans, English-Americans, French-Americans, Scandinavian-Americans or Italian-Americans, each preserving its separate nationality, each at heart feeling more sympathy with Europeans of that nationality, than with the other citizens of the American Republic… There is no such thing as a hyphenated American who is a good American. The only man who is a good American is the man who is an American and nothing else.”
-T. Roosevelt
Even though some of our most prominent leaders were able to see well into the future on the issue of race/ethnicity and national cohesion, I seriously have my doubts whether our nation can break free from the immenseness of such psychological baggage and all the history associated with it. I totally agree with MM — screw the hyphens and be just another American already, ok?
How? Explain the offense in detail. Show your work; use extra pages if needed.
This article is probably one of the dumbest I’ve seen – even for you folks.
But the comments are just plain bizarre. Why does anyone care how people define themselves? And what does Obama have to do with any of this? And how many of you folks would ever vote for a person of color?
Good point. Here’s a paper by R.C. Lewontin on whether race is real. It’s a bit of a read and difficult to summarize. But when you do read it, you’ll see that the democrats are exactly what we thought — race hustlers with no idea about what race is anyway.
Ilovemycountry said:
And how much is Soros paying you to slither through this site?
My blood consists of Scot (with the occasional excess of Scotch), Welsh & Dutch.
Having never been to any of those places, and not wanting to play favorites with my grandparents (I don’t believe the one drop rule applies), I just put “Non-Spanish Euro-American” on the census.
I have. When I find that he or she is intelligent and not socialist. Color is irrelevant. See #2 above and listen to Morgan Freeman.
I, our house, would vote for any person of color if they held our values! We have a black man here in TX that will be running for dear kay’s seat and we will vote for him. The shade of ones skin has zero to do with our vote, the person in the skin is what matters!
L
Screw the hyphens.
Excatly.
All my grandparents came from the same Mediterranean country, which has been at the crossroads of three continents for thousands of years.
I would not be surprised if I were some type of mix of Slav, Jewish, Greek, Norman, black African, Persian, Turkish, Scandinavian, Italian, Arab, French, German,…you get the idea….
Good one!!!
The only thing that matters about Barack Obama is that he is an unapologetic 19th century Marxian Socialist who is intent on placing America under economic martial law. He has started off smashingly.
I happily cast my votes for Allan West and Marco Rubio. Is that enough color?
@ Michelle
Hungarian?!
I raise a glass of 7-star Tokaj to you!
John Winger: We’re all very different people. We’re not Watusi. We’re not Spartans. We’re Americans, with a capital ‘A’, huh? You know what that means? Do ya? That means that our forefathers were kicked out of every decent country in the world. We are the wretched refuse. We’re the underdog. We’re mutts! Here’s proof: his nose is cold! But there’s no animal that’s more faithful, that’s more loyal, more loveable than the mutt. Who saw “Old Yeller?” Who cried when Old Yeller got shot at the end?
The article is quite relevant given how important the politics of race is to the Administration in its drive to polarize the country. If “folks” like you don’t acknowledge that clear strategy then you should not be voting at all, because you either will not or cannot understand what is at stake.
I’d like to see Rubio and West in the White House as a matter of fact. That would make the Left spontaneously combust.
I have long been posting here and expressing my desire to put an end to the “hyphenated-American” for many of the reasons being stated here and am glad to see others getting on my band-wagon … I find that “hyphen” very offensive as it intones more pride in the ethnicity before the hyphen than the “American” portion that follows the hyphen …
On D-Day my late father didn’t give a damn what race, color, religion, or anything else along those lines that could have been used to describe his fellow soldiers as they were storming the beaches of Normandy … all that mattered was that they were fellow “Americans” …
My uncles didn’t care about those things when they served in Korea …
In Viet Nam I didn’t care about any of those things for the same reasons my father passed on to me during my childhood … they were of no importance if they were Americans …
None of my children care about those things either … I am very proud of them for that … and we have several various ethnic family histories among our in-laws … add in all the friends and a family party can look like a U. N. meeting …
Thanks Michelle for going after this issue … I hope your bringing it forward will help get more people to recognize the hypocrisy of that lousy “hyphen” …
Sorry for the “rant” folks but this is one of my “soap box” issues …
Last month I signed up for a continuing ed class at an art school here in NYC. I was required to disclose race- to take a silkscreening class??!! First the form asked if I was Hispanic- and if not what race I was I. I asked the communist behind the desk why they needed to know this. He had no answer- no one had challenged them on this before.
I really wanted to ask why the first choice was Hispanic- but I also wanted to take my class.
Leftists are obsessed with race because they see it as a trait which they can exploit in order to gain an advantage and take away resources from others in the name of ‘social justice’. Once race loses its usefulness, they will move on to the next critera. Future criteria might include weight, height or some other identifier, but rest assured, they will conjur up some grevience based difference.
I used to live in Scarborough, Ontario, Canada (just east of the city of Toronto) and was a minority based on the demographics present in the city. Yes, I am white, but 80% of the population of Scarborough is non-white, with the dominant groups being chinese. indian (south asian) and black.
When I applied for jobs, I used to sarcastically check off the box next to ‘member of a visible minority group’ if it was an option on the application form. Upon being interviewed, I loved to debate the interviewer who often questioned my minority status, since of cousre, I was caucasion. I would always respond with the same answer, which was ‘if I am outnumbered by non-white individuals of a particular group or groups and am white myself, does that not define me as a minority?
It was so enjoyable to get them to admit to their dishonest bias when defining minority status. Most interviewers would admit that I was correct based on the truest definition of minority status, but would advocate that only non-whites were considered viable minorities for affirmative action purposes.
In our Charter of Rights and Freedoms (similar to America’s Bill of Rights I believe), our government changed the legislation by adding a not-withstanding clause which specifically allows discrimination based on race, sexual orientation etc. in relation to affirmative action initiatives. The funny thing is that this clause is inserted right after the preliminary clause which specifically makes it illegal to discrimate on those mentioned criterion. Here is the link if you want to see the irony of it all:
http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/charter/1.html#anchorbo-ga:l_I-gb:s_15
Here is the reference if you don’t wish to click through to the link:
Equality Rights
Equality before and under law and equal protection and benefit of law
15. (1) Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.
Affirmative action programs
(2) Subsection (1) does not preclude any law, program or activity that has as its object the amelioration of conditions of disadvantaged individuals or groups including those that are disadvantaged because of race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.(84)
This is a relevant issue in our society as it has the government does not view people as equal. For example, at my childrens school they were given a demographics form to bring home for us to fill out. The main question was about race. I called the school and asked why is the race of my child relevant to their learning. I was told that the more minority race students a school has the more money they get from the government. To which I replied that race should not matter education should be equally taught to all.
When we start interjecting race into everything we loose the true vision of Dr. King who believed we should judge a man by the content of his character not the color of his skin.
You must be in the same district as me, I also voted for these two “minorities”.
The point of the article is obviously lost on you, it is only relevant to the authorities wishing to pigeonhole ethnic groups. Why is this so? For anyone who believes that color or ethnicity is irrelevant when we live in a country that espouses equal rights for all, checking a box that separates society into groups is a moot point. America is long past the days of segregation, it’s time the powers that be to recognize this and stop their own version of segregation. That’s why this is a relevant article, because only until ordinary people put the authorities on notice that we the people will not stand for being segregated into groups will this stop.
BTW, I’m a European by birth and an American by choice.
Indeed.
On March 18, 2008, Obama gave a speech (in response to the “Reverend” Jeremiah Wright controversy) and the media called it “an important speech on race”.
It was one of the most racist and divisive speeches I have ever heard, using references to race and skin color 123 times…
Then, on August 28, 2008, exactly forty-five years after the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. shared his dream for America, Senator Barack Hussein Obama II tried to convince everyone that he is the fulfillment of that dream.
I contend that Obama is the antithesis of King’s dream…
Thank you for quickly identifying yourself as a leftist troll who has come on this site to insult its frequent users. I now know not to read or focus on anything you have to say going forward.
At least with Chap, he will keep the discussion respectful, debate others and once in a while concede to a good point made by others.
Why is this so?
It makes it much easier to identify the “us” and the “them”, that’s why.
Indeed. screw the hyphens…
havingsaid that, I really don’t know which side of this argument to come down on … until I see another dour faced Hillary Clinton speech that is… (sorry, o/t, but is anyone else as didained as me by our S-O-S’s “oh-so-serious” sotte voce delivery when she tries to takle on tough subjects like Egypt.
gimme a freaking break. She’s got that 1000-yard “Tuzla stare” thing goin’ on and it is truly retch-worthy….
didained + disdained (not really the right word, but at least I can spell it right!)
Obama isn’t the first post-racial president, he’s the first post-turtle president.
I think the word you were looking for is disgusted.
You’ve been on this site long enough to know that folks on here are very willing to vote for “a person of color.”
It’s your side that demonstrates disgusting displays of hatred for people of color simply because they might be a bit conservative.
If you have been paying attention – you would have noticed the disproportionately large numbers of people here who are “of color” or are married to people of color, and even have children “of color”.
The idea that Conservatives are racists is a stubborn myth for the left – but effective since people like you seem incapable of thinking.
ilovemycount
begone vile imp
Already have. And, borrowing from some famous words uttered a while back.. unlike you, I vote based on the ‘content of one’s character’ not by the color of one’s skin.
And yet he returns to comment.
Michelle isn’t 100% Filipino??? I just lost all respect for her. How dare she bring shame to her people.
I cannot believe the NY Times would publish this article. Just two days before National Black History Month. What is the Times’ ulterior motive?
From reading the article, these students are still nonsensical idiots. Focused solely on the color of their skin, not their “cultural heritage“… food, music, clothing, dance, customs, communication, inventiveness, religion, artistries, politics, family traditions.
I’m always making fun of my Germanic barbarian heritage. Imitating the stereotypical accent, strict non-humorous vocals, complimenting the great invention called the coo coo clock, Oktoberfest, yodelers and lederhosen outfits.
You folks watch Fox News right?
Check out some of their posts:
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2011/1/28/939727/-Fox-Nations-Gorilla-Story-Stirs-Racist-Frenzy
Good article MM.
And I’m happy to see this Michelle López-Mullins stir up the pot a bit.
IMO her interest in her/others’ racial origins’ represented by her quote:
is good for cocktail party banter but actions make the man.
Also, hyphens have always given me a bad first impression of a person.
Six commenters post inappropriate comments, so you want to paint every conservative as racist because of it?
There’s a name for that. Can somebody help me here?
Me too. I would be weary of dating a woman with a hyphenated name. They usually are liberal, have a dislike of men which is overly strong and tend to be unnecessarily combative.
You got that right, and most lack confidence.
I wrote Amercian on my census form. In refelection, as a federalist, maybe I should have claimed to be Minnesotan.
JD–’projection’
JD-’retarded’
John Deaux said:
In the case of Ilovemycountry I would say he/she/it suffers from infantilism.
This
Scotch-Irish, German, Swedish, Cherokee InjunAmerican couldn’t agree more, MM.As a person who could exploit all those “-American” tags…let me say that I wish to be judged by my actions and my character, not by the stereotype of a group of people that may share some miniscule genetic quirck or birth happenstance.
Whereas I maybe the member of many subsets as others feel the need to catagorize…I choose American as my affiliation.
I know there is perceived power by identifying with a group that may or may have not been wronged by another. I choose to stand on my own and wish that others would judge me as such.
After all, being a horse’s *ss like me transcends all racial, ethnic, political, and social groupings.
Thank you.
On January 31st, 2011 at 10:37 am, troll said:
I voted enthusiastically for a so-called “person of color” three times in 2010 (no, I’m not a Democrat voting more than once! It was all above board…)
1) Primary
2) Run-off primary
3) General election
Unfortunately, he didn’t win. Why not? Because our district is gerrymandered to include “majority minority” sections of three cities, so the district consistently goes 60% Democrat. (Hopefully that will change with now-Republican-led redistricting!)
If the troll’s premise were true, the candidate would have lost the Republican primary due to not enough whites voting for a “person of color”.
However, the black Republican candidate won the Republican primary.
Sadly, though, he lost the general election because not enough “people of color” voted for a Republican “person of color”.
So 6 comments taht some people posted should paint everyone with the same brush? So following your theory that would make you a racist as you have been to daily kos, so that must mean that you also go to DU which has posters making racist comments about Rev. Hayes.
I hope you now see how retarded it is to try and place guilt by association on people, though I doubt it.
On January 31st, 2011 at 11:35 am, flmom said:
max said:
I think the word you were looking for is disgusted.
Thanks FLmoms… I knew it was a “D” word!
Maybe you need to look at what Dr. King said once again. Remeber he said to judge a man by the content of his character not the color of his skin. That could very easily be changed to vote for a candidate based on the content of his character not the color of your skin.
Indeed. For the sake of my
British-French-German-Swiss-Macedonianall-American children, may it flourish.We of the Mayan-Spanish Hybrid Association (sponsored by Toyota Prius?) object, I think.
But the weenies, whiners and crybabies of the Race Hustler/Grievance Movement need a cause-who are we to deny them? Good for Ms. López-Mullins.
Neanderthals Rock, weenies whine.
Where I work there are all sorts of forums or groups supported by this big multi-national corporation. The ‘hispanic’ forum, the ‘Pacific Islander’ forum, the ‘African-American’ forum, etc…. (but oddly no white or european forums… but I digress…)
Anyway my point is that I won’t support any of these because I feel that any organization which discriminates based on race – any race – is by definition a RACIST organization. And the above groups, as well as the Black Congressional Caucus, NAACP, etc… are just as racist and bad as the KKK.
I listed myself as “other” and “American” under RACE when I filled out my census form…exactly the way it shows above. I am disgusted by the way liberals use race to divide us.
The Democrat Party is the party of racism. It has always been the party of racism, and it will always be the party of racism.
It was the party of racism when the slaveowner Jefferson (who did not even free his slaves when he died, as Washington did) ran against John Adams, who despised slavery.
It was the party of racism during the Civil War. It was the party of racism during the era of segregation and Jim Crow.
It was the party of racism directed against blacks right up until they switched to being the party of racism directed against asians and non-hispanic whites.
The Democrat Party is the party of scum. The last thing they want is to be judged by the content of their character.
Plus he built the Batmobile!
Roland …
It’s kind of difficult to be “judged by the content of your character” when you “HAVE NO CHARACTER” …
CARTOON comes to mind….
and he was Crank on The Electric Company!
I’ve been saying this from day one. I don’t know why he gets to claim only half his racial makeup and is considered “authentically black,” but folks like me with more african makeup aren’t “black enough” because I don’t vote for BHO.
Go figure.
“You see, it’s… it’s no good, Montag. We’ve all got to be alike. The only way to be happy is for everyone to be made equal.”
–Fahrenheit 451
Liberals 2007
Dissent is the highest form of patriotism.
Liberals 2009
Dissent is racist.
Liberals 2011
Dissent is murder.
Major, the elitist, know-it-all opposite-worldview holders believe that you don’t any better; indeed, that you don’t know what is best for you; that they, and only they, know better than you what is best for you.
They believe that it would be best for you if you would act “authentic”…whatever the hell that is supposed to mean.
None of us. We vote for people with good Christian Conservative values. Some of those people do happen to be of another race, like Allen West, Marko Rubio, and J.C. Watts.
We leave the “Vote for people of color” to the people who judge others that way, like you and other looney leftwing liberals do.
I left all questions unanswered on the census from except the enumeration question. Libs can’t function with out pandering to the group du jour. No legislative district should be drawn using the races of those who live there. The Constitution states “persons”, not persons by category. All the identity politics play into the hands of the race baiters. It is content of character. Those with no character need the victim card to gain leverage.
Frankly, there are racist-sounding comments here from time to time. Sometimes they are confronted, most often ignored and rightly so.
But the censors criteria puzzle me. Once I had a comment booted because I suggested a poster get a second opinion on a risky investment. And recently, I faintly praised a Democrat Senator whom I slightly know. Both comments didn’t make the cut, but occasional racist-sounding comments sometimes fly through the radar. I don’t get it but it’s not my blog either.
My basic point to Ilovemycountry is this: if anyone doesn’t like it, they can go elsewhere.
So, who is it that is obsessed with the color of his skin?
Right. The organization whose very name obsesses with skin color.
I don’t vote for commies, marxists, radicals or jerks. Phenotypes are never considered. I’m interested in what a person thinks and believes not skin color or ethnic heritage.
And therein lies one of the great mysteries of life.
Why are there so many more horse’s *sses than there are horses?
It’s probably not a shock to anyone who knows my style of posting that I have had comments removed from MM and many other sites I have posted on. On the whole though, the MM site is extremely lenient towards my comments. Maybe its because I always profess my love for the boss that I get treated well or maybe MM or Jesse feels bad for me that I am Canadian.
Anyway, I consider it part of experience of posting on the internet to have comments removed and even get banned once in a while (yes I have been banned from websites before). If no one ever posted anything that was remotely worth deleting, can you imagine all the debate that would be stiffled?
On January 31st, 2011 at 2:03 pm, tre said:
Indeed.
As an update to my 12:37 pm comment, I should note that I voted for Bill Randall not because of the color of his skin, but because of the content of his character.
Bill Randall stands for the same things for which I stand,
while the guy who “looks like me” (Brad Miller) does NOT.
Skin color wasn’t even close to being a factor in how I voted.
I wish I could say the same about my racist friend.
I only vote for honest politicians who respect my desire to live a free life. I guess that’s why I don’t vote that often, for there aren’t many politicians who own those qualities.
Whew! I just had a spontaneous bronchial spasm when I thought I read Ward Churchill. My bad.
O/T=Fed judge in FL rules bhocare unconstitutional! Thank you judge. I think 26 states were involved asking for this. It will go to the SC most feel. bho is not having a fun week is he?
L
letget said:
We are all awaiting a communiqué from the Puppet Bunker to address this latest setback.
Letget: Is that the most recent decision, meaning the updated court-decision count now stands at 2-2? If so, that is a huge win for those that want private healthcare to survive.
123upnorth#83,
This was from just an hour or so ago.
stillontheroad#82,
I haven’t heard if bho will say anything, but you can bet your bippy every person in America will be blamed for this, not him.
L
letget said:
Yep, it will be our lack of education or we are just selfish.
SOTR–do you not understand you must pay your fair share? It’s only fair.
*I proudly put American on the census form; And as far as I am concerned, per the constitution, that is where it ends; But with a hater/divider in the WH, expect things to get worse; Let’s change that in 2012!
FIFY….
spaceycakes said:
For a moment there, my wallet felt a little heavier and it felt like, victory.
By the way, regarding the term ‘Asian’, why is it that people use it to suggest race when it clearly refers to geography, and even then, is tremendously unspecific and therefore useless.
For example, the continent of Asia includes countries such as Russia, Saudi Arabia, India, Japan etc. Now call me crazy, but isn’t it a little too general to group an Arab, Indian, Japanese and Russian all into one group?
These individuals don’t look at all alike, don’t have similar cultural values, don’t speak the same language etc, yet they are generally classified by everyone as being ‘Asian’.
Contrary to popular belief on the left, using the term ‘oriental’ to refer to someone from China, Japan, Korea etc. is not taken as offensive by 99% of the people who are Chinese, Japanese or Korean. In fact, up until about 12 years ago, ‘Asian’ people referred to themselves as ‘oriental’. They stopped doing so when the American left starting dictating to everyone that such a term was to be received as offensive. But having said that, even to this day, oriental people still aren’t offended when you use the term to describe them.
Proud of my German heritage, I am and will always be an American first.
Still, you can imagine the chuckle I got out of it when I was called a N!GG** in public by a dude of African descent – and a fat one at that!
In Camden, it’s evidently a term of endearment…
RWR
http://www.rightwingrocker.com
Amen.
I took my mirror site down at townhall.com for that very reason.
Come by the RWRepublic anytime, 123 …
RWR
http://www.rightwingrocker.com
Jefferson may have been a slaveowner, but he was (despite the Donks’ desire to claim him), NOT a Democrat.
The Democratic Party was formed in the 1830s, AFTER Jefferson’s death in 1826.
Oh, and just so you know, despite big political differences, Thomas Jefferson’s best friend was none other than John Adams. They died mere hours apart.
A little Early US history for ya there. Stuff they SHOULD have taught you in school, but most likely didn’t.
RWR
http://www.rightwingrocker.com
I also take issue with the Democrats being the party of racism in the early 19th Century. The party did not agree with the national abolitionist movement, but believed that the individual States should have control over the time and manner of abolition within their sovereign borders.
Their 1840 Platform, save for its position on slavery (which when put into the context mentioned above isn’t such a big deal), would actually be a pretty amazing platform for a great party today’s needs.
Seriously, skip the part on slavery and tell me this isn’t EXACTLY what we should be shooting for.
RWR
http://www.rightwingrocker.com
If I remember correctly, on July 4th!
Yes, Granite, you do remember correctly.
On the 50th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence.
RWR
http://www.rightwingrocker.com
Here’s a post I did on the 1840 Democrat Platform about five years ago.
RWR
http://www.rightwingrocker.com
Too many Mists or Blues today, eh?
I have to disagree. The building of the Democratic Party in the 1830′s was just a rebranding of the Democratic-Republican Party that had disintegrated in 1824. Remember that wikipedia is not definitive.
Jefferson was a Democrat through and through. Think Bill Clinton. He was a charming, sleazy, hypocritical, brilliant policy wonk of poor character who had no problem spouting lofty ideals while behaving like a cad.
And he was a racist.
As I pointed out in my previous post, the Democratic Party is consistent in its support for racism, and that support for treating people of different races differently runs straight through from Jefferson to Obama.
Since the beginning of the Republic Democrats have gained political benefit from painting one race or another as deserving of being treated better or worse just because of their race.
Democrats are scum.
Let’s not forget that John Adams spent a good deal of time hating Thomas Jefferson until the death of Abigail Adams. Jefferson openly criticized Adams while serving as his vice president in order to further his political career.
The part that amazes me is that the differences between the parties for the first fifty years or so would fit fairly well within the GOP platform. I don’t know where the hell the current Dem platform came from.