Obama explains Black Americans to America

[FaxModem1]

NPR

Obama Explains Black America To White America

by
July 19, 2013 6:42 PM
President Obama tackled race head-on in his first on-camera response to George Zimmerman's acquittal in the shooting death of Florida teenager Trayvon Martin.

President Obama tackled race head-on in his first on-camera response to George Zimmerman's acquittal in the shooting death of Florida teenager Trayvon Martin.
Carolyn Kaster/AP

The days are few and far between when President Obama has intentionally reminded us that he is the first African-American president.

Friday was one.

The president did something no other holder of his office has ever had the life experience to do: He used the bully pulpit to, as an African-American, explain black America to white America in the wake of last week's acquittal of George Zimmerman in the shooting death of unarmed teenager Trayvon Martin.

Appearing unannounced before surprised reporters who were expecting the White House press secretary, it was Obama — "the bridge" as New Yorker editor David Remnick has called him — trying to span a divide. It was Obama trying to help white Americans comprehend black America's reaction to the Martin-Zimmerman tragedy.

To a degree, it was reminiscent of the widely hailed Philadelphia speech Obama made during to explain American racial realities during the controversy over the Rev. Jeremiah Wright.

For that moment, Obama's bridge went two ways as he explained whites to blacks and blacks to whites. That speech found Obama standing between two races as the son of a black African father and white American mother and translating for each side.

Not so with Friday's remarks: They were one way. The president focused on why so many African-Americans have reacted as if they were gut-punched from the time they first learned of the circumstances surrounding the shooting until the verdict. He made no attempt to explain whites to blacks.

To whites who have insisted the case wasn't about race, the president explained why so many blacks disagree. In a powerful reminder of his unique place in history, he cited his own personal experience as an African-American.

You know, when Trayvon Martin was first shot, I said that this could have been my son. Another way of saying that is, Trayvon Martin could have been me 35 years ago. And when you think about why, in the African-American community at least, there's a lot of pain around what happened here, I think it's important to recognize that the African-American community is looking at this issue through a set of experiences and a history that — that doesn't go away.

There are very few African-American men in this country who haven't had the experience of being followed when they were shopping in a department store. That includes me.

While other presidents have had their common-man stories of hardship or challenge, this is first time a president has been able to tell this particular story of being a minority who was racially profiled.

Or the story of the head of the Justice Department, for that matter. Just days ago Attorney General Eric Holder told of how, when he was a U.S. attorney, police stopped him as he ran down a Washington street because he was trying to make it to a movie.

The president is right that it seems like almost every African-American male has at least one story about being profiled. As a teenager in New York City heading to basketball games with teammates I was twice stopped by police officers who held their guns on us because, they said, we fit the description of crime suspects they were looking for. We were walking while black.

While he was ever Obama, gentle and cautious in his comments, the president made clear his strong disagreement with those who suggest blacks should be more concerned about violence by blacks against other blacks than by whites against blacks since the former poses the greater threat to young black males.

This made for another striking moment. Obama essentially said to white Americans "we get it," but he went further. He suggested that what bothers many blacks is that too many whites act as if this violence came out of nowhere. Or if not nowhere, out of some moral or other difference in black people.

We understand that some of the violence that takes place in poor black neighborhoods around the country is born out of a very violent past in this country, and that the poverty and dysfunction that we see in those communities can be traced to a very difficult history.

And so the fact that sometimes that's unacknowledged adds to the frustration. And the fact that a lot of African-American boys are painted with a broad brush and the excuse is given, well, there are these statistics out there that show that African-American boys are more violent — using that as an excuse to then see sons treated differently causes pain.

It's potent stuff to blame the violence in black neighborhoods on the violence and poverty tens of millions of blacks have been subjected to over the course of American history. It was Obama telling many white Americans to stop blaming the victim.

Obama's Friday comments very likely went some way toward satisfying many African-Americans who had wanted to hear from the president ever since the Zimmerman verdict came down — and wondered where he was. Aside from a brief written statement issued shortly after Zimmerman was acquitted, he had been quiet on the issue.

Conservative reaction ranged from to scornful.

For a president who has in the past drawn significant criticism from many blacks for lecturing to African-American audiences about the need to be more responsible parents, Friday's message came from a completely different direction.

Interestingly, though, in a way it came from the same place, the president's identity as African-American. As the nation's first black president, he has been in the unique position of being able to speak to black audiences about the need for greater responsibility.

But it was also that very African-Americaness that allowed him to speak so personally and honestly about the Martin-Zimmerman case and to be the bridge to whites that might help them better understand what so many blacks have been experiencing.

[energiewende]

Barack Obama is a law professor, yet he continues to comment on this case as thought Zimmerman is certainly guilty, when the evidence doesn't indicate that at all. Doesn't this bother him? Even if he wants to make this point anyway, and I at least partially sympathise, doesn't his sense of ethics demand that he tell his audience first that Zimmerman personally is not guilty of any crime? Of course nor does he directly say anything defamatory about Zimmerman, he just strongly implies. It's all rather slimy in my opinion.

[Alyrium Denryle]

Barack Obama is a law professor, yet he continues to comment on this case as thought Zimmerman is certainly guilty, when the evidence doesn't indicate that at all. Doesn't this bother him? Even if he wants to make this point anyway, and I at least partially sympathise, doesn't his sense of ethics demand that he tell his audience first that Zimmerman personally is not guilty of any crime? Of course nor does he directly say anything defamatory about Zimmerman, he just strongly implies. It's all rather slimy in my opinion.

It is funny how deliberately obtuse you are. Even if Zimmerman did not hit Trayvon first--something far from certain given phone conversations had between trayvon and a friend of his--it is an indisputable fact that Zimmerman racially profiled Trayvon martin. I can say this, with absolute certainty, because he only called in suspicious black people after a set of unsolved burglaries.

The African American community is outraged by this. The legality of the shooting in this context is completely fucking irrelevant. An unarmed black 17 year old was killed in a dubious-but-legally-defensible self defense claim. This strikes certain lynchy cords in the collective memory of the black community. The Zimmerman case is symbolic, its meaning extends beyond the events of the incident.

[energiewende]

it is an indisputable fact that Zimmerman racially profiled Trayvon martin

That's readily disputable, since there's no evidence of it at all. It is of course possible. It's possible that Zimmerman threw the first punch, and is in fact guilty of murder. But given that this hasn't been proved, I don't think the President of the United States should be trying to rewrite history.

It's also irrelevant. if Zimmerman had "profiled" Martin and then no fight had taken place, no crime would have been committed and no one would have been harmed. Similarly if he hadn't "profiled" Martin but had shot him when not in any danger, he would still be a murderer. This case hinges entirely on Zimmerman's self-defence claim and it's, while hardly watertight, strong enough for reasonable doubt. There's simply nothing interesting or politically charged about this case at all, except for what the press and politicians themselves have tried to stamp onto it. It's just another depressingly ambiguous series of actions and misunderstandings that lead to a tragic conclusion neither side specifically intended, like most murders outside of TV.

[Crown]

it is an indisputable fact that Zimmerman racially profiled Trayvon martin.

Is this your subtle way of asking for a dictionary for a Christmas gift this year or something?

[Thanas]

Can we just stop the tangent energiewende started right here? If you can't, I will.

Obama's speech was about the effect the case had on the black community and their experiences. It was a masterful speech. Let us discuss the speech here and the case in the other thread, you know the one specifically dedicated to it.

[Arthur_Tuxedo]

What Part of "IF YOU CAN'T, I WILL" did you not understand?

[Saxtonite]

For that moment, Obama's bridge went two ways as he explained whites to blacks and blacks to whites. That speech found Obama standing between two races as the son of a black African father and white American mother and translating for each side.

<snip>

For a president who has in the past drawn significant criticism from many blacks for lecturing to African-American audiences about the need to be more responsible parents, Friday's message came from a completely different direction.

Interestingly, though, in a way it came from the same place, the president's identity as African-American. As the nation's first black president, he has been in the unique position of being able to speak to black audiences about the need for greater responsibility.

Obama's speech was about the effect the case had on the black community and their experiences. It was a masterful speech. Let us discuss the speech here and the case in the other thread, you know the one specifically dedicated to it.

There is an irony of a half white multimillionaire raised by his white family in a state (Hawaii) which historically was more supportive of micegegnation and also had formative experiences in other countries claiming to know -exactly- how it feels to be a poor guy whose' grandparents dealt with jim crow and lynching and whatnot. And yes, I know his 'community organizing' provided him some information, but still I understand that claim about paternalism (read: "Uncle Tom") coming from. Fathers take care of their sons? Hah, the Deadbeat Dad is a MYTH. Most fathers do not abandon their children.*

EDIT: His children went to UChicago Lab Schools** (and could've easily gotten into Lane or Whitney Young or Chicago Ag or whatever***). Yeah, I am sure he knows the struggle of being a poor black man.......

*Note this statement applies ACROSS ethnic groups and races.

**Private school for offspring of those who teach at University of Chicago. Pretty prestigious. I judged one of their debate teams. Apparently mainly (Askhenazi) Jewish and (East) Asian predominantely, unless I am wrong.

***Public Magnet Schools

[Imperial Overlord]

Obama became a millionaire off of book sales after his political career took off, not because his family was rich. His actual background was fairly middle class.

[energiewende]

What Part of "IF YOU CAN'T, I WILL" did you not understand?

[Thanas]

Apparently both energiewende and Arthur Tuxedo are incapable of reading. Anybody else who pulls this stuff gets a warning.

[energiewende]

My apologies, but did you have to also edit-delete the part of my post that was not addressed to that topic? I even separated it and said I would happily delete the offending part myself if it was not allowed.

[Thanas]

My apologies, but did you have to also edit-delete the part of my post that was not addressed to that topic? I even separated it and said I would happily delete the offending part myself if it was not allowed.

Your weasel-words of "I know this is breaking the rules but I will edit it out if Thanas takes the time to sift through my post and then reaffirms his earlier order" did not impress me. If you see someone breaking the rules, you do not follow it up with a similar violation. You instead report that person. So that is why your entire post got trashed.

[Simon_Jester]

In case people would like to discuss the actual speech, here is the text of the actual speech, as opposed to an article about the speech:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/1 ... 24884.html

I wanted to come out here, first of all, to tell you that Jay is prepared for all your questions and is very much looking forward to the session. The second thing is I want to let you know that over the next couple of weeks, there’s going to obviously be a whole range of issues -- immigration, economics, et cetera -- we'll try to arrange a fuller press conference to address your questions.

The reason I actually wanted to come out today is not to take questions, but to speak to an issue that obviously has gotten a lot of attention over the course of the last week -- the issue of the Trayvon Martin ruling. I gave a preliminary statement right after the ruling on Sunday. But watching the debate over the course of the last week, I thought it might be useful for me to expand on my thoughts a little bit.

First of all, I want to make sure that, once again, I send my thoughts and prayers, as well as Michelle’s, to the family of Trayvon Martin, and to remark on the incredible grace and dignity with which they’ve dealt with the entire situation. I can only imagine what they’re going through, and it’s remarkable how they’ve handled it.



The second thing I want to say is to reiterate what I said on Sunday, which is there’s going to be a lot of arguments about the legal issues in the case -- I'll let all the legal analysts and talking heads address those issues. The judge conducted the trial in a professional manner. The prosecution and the defense made their arguments. The juries were properly instructed that in a case such as this reasonable doubt was relevant, and they rendered a verdict. And once the jury has spoken, that's how our system works. But I did want to just talk a little bit about context and how people have responded to it and how people are feeling.

You know, when Trayvon Martin was first shot I said that this could have been my son. Another way of saying that is Trayvon Martin could have been me 35 years ago. And when you think about why, in the African American community at least, there’s a lot of pain around what happened here, I think it’s important to recognize that the African American community is looking at this issue through a set of experiences and a history that doesn’t go away.

There are very few African American men in this country who haven't had the experience of being followed when they were shopping in a department store. That includes me. There are very few African American men who haven't had the experience of walking across the street and hearing the locks click on the doors of cars. That happens to me -- at least before I was a senator. There are very few African Americans who haven't had the experience of getting on an elevator and a woman clutching her purse nervously and holding her breath until she had a chance to get off. That happens often.



And I don't want to exaggerate this, but those sets of experiences inform how the African American community interprets what happened one night in Florida. And it’s inescapable for people to bring those experiences to bear. The African American community is also knowledgeable that there is a history of racial disparities in the application of our criminal laws -- everything from the death penalty to enforcement of our drug laws. And that ends up having an impact in terms of how people interpret the case.

Now, this isn't to say that the African American community is naïve about the fact that African American young men are disproportionately involved in the criminal justice system; that they’re disproportionately both victims and perpetrators of violence. It’s not to make excuses for that fact -- although black folks do interpret the reasons for that in a historical context. They understand that some of the violence that takes place in poor black neighborhoods around the country is born out of a very violent past in this country, and that the poverty and dysfunction that we see in those communities can be traced to a very difficult history.



And so the fact that sometimes that’s unacknowledged adds to the frustration. And the fact that a lot of African American boys are painted with a broad brush and the excuse is given, well, there are these statistics out there that show that African American boys are more violent -- using that as an excuse to then see sons treated differently causes pain.

I think the African American community is also not naïve in understanding that, statistically, somebody like Trayvon Martin was statistically more likely to be shot by a peer than he was by somebody else. So folks understand the challenges that exist for African American boys. But they get frustrated, I think, if they feel that there’s no context for it and that context is being denied. And that all contributes I think to a sense that if a white male teen was involved in the same kind of scenario, that, from top to bottom, both the outcome and the aftermath might have been different.

Now, the question for me at least, and I think for a lot of folks, is where do we take this? How do we learn some lessons from this and move in a positive direction? I think it’s understandable that there have been demonstrations and vigils and protests, and some of that stuff is just going to have to work its way through, as long as it remains nonviolent. If I see any violence, then I will remind folks that that dishonors what happened to Trayvon Martin and his family. But beyond protests or vigils, the question is, are there some concrete things that we might be able to do.



I know that Eric Holder is reviewing what happened down there, but I think it’s important for people to have some clear expectations here. Traditionally, these are issues of state and local government, the criminal code. And law enforcement is traditionally done at the state and local levels, not at the federal levels.

That doesn’t mean, though, that as a nation we can’t do some things that I think would be productive. So let me just give a couple of specifics that I’m still bouncing around with my staff, so we’re not rolling out some five-point plan, but some areas where I think all of us could potentially focus.

Number one, precisely because law enforcement is often determined at the state and local level, I think it would be productive for the Justice Department, governors, mayors to work with law enforcement about training at the state and local levels in order to reduce the kind of mistrust in the system that sometimes currently exists.

When I was in Illinois, I passed racial profiling legislation, and it actually did just two simple things. One, it collected data on traffic stops and the race of the person who was stopped. But the other thing was it resourced us training police departments across the state on how to think about potential racial bias and ways to further professionalize what they were doing.



And initially, the police departments across the state were resistant, but actually they came to recognize that if it was done in a fair, straightforward way that it would allow them to do their jobs better and communities would have more confidence in them and, in turn, be more helpful in applying the law. And obviously, law enforcement has got a very tough job.

So that’s one area where I think there are a lot of resources and best practices that could be brought to bear if state and local governments are receptive. And I think a lot of them would be. And let's figure out are there ways for us to push out that kind of training.

Along the same lines, I think it would be useful for us to examine some state and local laws to see if it -- if they are designed in such a way that they may encourage the kinds of altercations and confrontations and tragedies that we saw in the Florida case, rather than diffuse potential altercations.

I know that there's been commentary about the fact that the "stand your ground" laws in Florida were not used as a defense in the case. On the other hand, if we're sending a message as a society in our communities that someone who is armed potentially has the right to use those firearms even if there's a way for them to exit from a situation, is that really going to be contributing to the kind of peace and security and order that we'd like to see?



And for those who resist that idea that we should think about something like these "stand your ground" laws, I'd just ask people to consider, if Trayvon Martin was of age and armed, could he have stood his ground on that sidewalk? And do we actually think that he would have been justified in shooting Mr. Zimmerman who had followed him in a car because he felt threatened? And if the answer to that question is at least ambiguous, then it seems to me that we might want to examine those kinds of laws.

Number three -- and this is a long-term project -- we need to spend some time in thinking about how do we bolster and reinforce our African American boys. And this is something that Michelle and I talk a lot about. There are a lot of kids out there who need help who are getting a lot of negative reinforcement. And is there more that we can do to give them the sense that their country cares about them and values them and is willing to invest in them?

I'm not naïve about the prospects of some grand, new federal program. I'm not sure that that’s what we're talking about here. But I do recognize that as President, I've got some convening power, and there are a lot of good programs that are being done across the country on this front. And for us to be able to gather together business leaders and local elected officials and clergy and celebrities and athletes, and figure out how are we doing a better job helping young African American men feel that they're a full part of this society and that they've got pathways and avenues to succeed -- I think that would be a pretty good outcome from what was obviously a tragic situation. And we're going to spend some time working on that and thinking about that.




And then, finally, I think it's going to be important for all of us to do some soul-searching. There has been talk about should we convene a conversation on race. I haven't seen that be particularly productive when politicians try to organize conversations. They end up being stilted and politicized, and folks are locked into the positions they already have. On the other hand, in families and churches and workplaces, there's the possibility that people are a little bit more honest, and at least you ask yourself your own questions about, am I wringing as much bias out of myself as I can? Am I judging people as much as I can, based on not the color of their skin, but the content of their character? That would, I think, be an appropriate exercise in the wake of this tragedy.

And let me just leave you with a final thought that, as difficult and challenging as this whole episode has been for a lot of people, I don’t want us to lose sight that things are getting better. Each successive generation seems to be making progress in changing attitudes when it comes to race. It doesn’t mean we’re in a post-racial society. It doesn’t mean that racism is eliminated. But when I talk to Malia and Sasha, and I listen to their friends and I seem them interact, they’re better than we are -- they’re better than we were -- on these issues. And that’s true in every community that I’ve visited all across the country.

And so we have to be vigilant and we have to work on these issues. And those of us in authority should be doing everything we can to encourage the better angels of our nature, as opposed to using these episodes to heighten divisions. But we should also have confidence that kids these days, I think, have more sense than we did back then, and certainly more than our parents did or our grandparents did; and that along this long, difficult journey, we’re becoming a more perfect union -- not a perfect union, but a more perfect union.

Thank you, guys.

There's a lot of food there for discussion that I saw just at a glance. It's noteworthy that in the speech itself, Obama says (to paraphrase) "I know there are a lot of complicated legal issues involved in this particular case, but I want to lay out the context, explain why African-Americans are upset, and talk about what we need to do as a nation to make this kind of thing stop happening."

We might be wise to listen to him about that; he has a point.

[Broomstick]

Barack Obama is a law professor, yet he continues to comment on this case as thought Zimmerman is certainly guilty, when the evidence doesn't indicate that at all. Doesn't this bother him?

Maybe he wasn't speaking as the law professor?

Look, absolutely no one disputes George Zimmerman shot and killed Trayvon Martin. No one. Mr. Zimmerman himself has never denied that he shot and killed Mr. Martin. The question for the recent court case was whether or not that death was a legal form of self-defense or a illegal murder. According to the court, under Florida law it was legal.

So here comes the great divide (very simplistically): there is one group that says “Yay! We can defend ourselves!” and another group that says “OMG! It's legal to kill one of us!”. It would be a little strange if those two groups weren't in conflict. I'm just grateful that (aside from a few exceptions) the conflict has manifested as peaceful protests and words rather than wide-scale rioting in multiple cities across the US.

While the law itself does not distinguish between black and white the concern is that in practice it either has or will be applied in a discriminatory manner. Hence the many repeated questions along the lines of if it had been Martin who had killed Zimmerman would Martin have been decreed not guilty, or would Martin have been convicted of murder? The cultural context is essential to understanding the conflict here. That can not be emphasized enough.

As Obama noted, if this sort of law escalates conflicts rather than dissipating them it might not be a law we want to have. We need to address these issues. Yes, we have made tremendous progress (the notion of a black PotUS even 25 years ago was not realistic, now we have one) but the job isn't done yet. These conflicts within our society must be addressed sooner or later. If the black demographic has a tendency to act paranoid and threatened they have reason to be that way.

[Broomstick]

There is an irony of a half white multimillionaire raised by his white family in a state (Hawaii) which historically was more supportive of micegegnation and also had formative experiences in other countries claiming to know -exactly- how it feels to be a poor guy whose' grandparents dealt with jim crow and lynching and whatnot.

First of all, the term “miscegenation” is often considered impolite in American society these days and carries a taint the term “mixed race” does not. Just in case anyone isn't clear on that.

Second, Obama was not born a millionaire. His upbringing was, at most, middle class and at times probably less than that. One of the reasons he got into Harvard – other than busting his ass as a student – was because his father had gone there and thus he qualified as a legacy admission. So yeah, he can speak of his experience as an “ordinary” American because up until he became a political superstar that was what he was. Well, other than being black. Which he really is, because I assure you no one watching him walk down the street is going to think “there goes a man half-white”. In the US he is categorized as a black man, even if everyone knows he's half white. Prior to becoming PotUS he was treated as a black man. That was part of the point of his speech.

Quite a bit of white America is aware of the race-based double-standard. In the 1990's I had a coworker who was a black man and when he needed a cab one of us white girls would stand on the sidewalk with him and hail one for him – because they would NEVER stop for a young black man, but they would stop for a young white woman (and they loathed the bait-and-switch, but didn't dare protest or refuse him when there was a white witness). That's the sort of daily insult and discrimination Obama was referring to, which any man of visible African ancestry is subjected to on a daily basis in the US. And yes, the cab drivers were doing that in part based on odds - young black men are disproportionately both victims and perpetrators of violence in the US, which Obama also acknowledged. It sucks that the good, law abiding black men get tarred with the same brush as the gangbangers. It's a serious problem in the US.

EDIT: His children went to UChicago Lab Schools** (and could've easily gotten into Lane or Whitney Young or Chicago Ag or whatever***). Yeah, I am sure he knows the struggle of being a poor black man.......

So... because he's wealthy now he couldn't have been a poor black child growing up? Did you take your stupid pills before posting that?

Of course he sent his daughters to good schools. It would be irresponsible for him as a parent to do otherwise. Parents in Chicago at all socio-economic levels struggle to send their kids to the best schools they can, in a city where the publicly funded system (outside of a few exceptions) have historically been utter shit. Hell, Detroit public schools historically provided a better education than most Chicago public schools, and it's not like Detroit has had money to throw at anything these past 40 years.

Or are you saying that black parents shouldn't send their children to the very best schools they can get their kids into? Or that parents who were poor in their youth shouldn't send their children to private schools if they could afford it?

Seriously, step back and take a look at what you just said. Whether you actually are a racist, classist douche-bag or not that's how you're coming across.

[The Kernel]

If anyone bothers to read the speech you'd realize that Barack Obama's relative wealth is totally irrelevant to the point he was making. In fact the idea that a black man would still be followed at a shopping mall or cause a woman to tense up when getting on an elevator despite his social background further reinforces the point he was trying to make in the first place.

Obama's speech was an attempt to explain to America why the African American community feels the way it does about this and it order to do so he gave us a look through the lens in which they see things that is informed by the subtle racism that still very much exists to this day. Sure lynch mobs and n-word bombs aren't modern racism, instead it's the little things that every black person in America has experienced but which is easy for everyone else to deny exists.

Casual racism is alive and well in the United States today. Sometimes it takes the form of small things, sometimes the result is a young boy getting shot for the crime of walking through a neighborhood.

[Saxtonite]

Second, Obama was not born a millionaire. His upbringing was, at most, middle class and at times probably less than that.

He had a head start in life with being transferred to different positions around the world, similar to 'missionary kids' and 'military brat' subculture. He was in locations where being 'black' mattered less than being 'american' (i.e. Indonesia)

So yeah, he can speak of his experience as an “ordinary” American because up until he became a political superstar that was what he was.

Yeah, Going to Punahou makes you "ordinary", just like having your grandfather get you into a prestigious school right? Note, Punahou is a prestigious school for Hawaiian children of priviledge.

In the US he is categorized as a black man, even if everyone knows he's half white. Prior to becoming PotUS he was treated as a black man. That was part of the point of his speech.

I don't think you noticed this, but White Americans are increasingly talking about how he is half white because they I guess want some of his "Swagga" to rub off onto him or something similar. You know, the "don't deny your white half" statements some white parents of 'black' children say.

So... because he's wealthy now he couldn't have been a poor black child growing up? Did you take your stupid pills before posting that?

No - his entire goddamned childhood was a case of priviledge.

Of course he sent his daughters to good schools. It would be irresponsible for him as a parent to do otherwise. Parents in Chicago at all socio-economic levels struggle to send their kids to the best schools they can, in a city where the publicly funded system (outside of a few exceptions) have historically been utter shit. Hell, Detroit public schools historically provided a better education than most Chicago public schools, and it's not like Detroit has had money to throw at anything these past 40 years.

Or are you saying that black parents shouldn't send their children to the very best schools they can get their kids into? Or that parents who were poor in their youth shouldn't send their children to private schools if they could afford it?

My point is due to his connections he could pretty much guarantee admissions to those magnet schools and whatnot, the same way it happened to him. What is this shit about him being a poor black man? I fell for that shit in 2008 even if I didn't exactly support the candidate then, but now "the emperor has no clothes"

Seriously, step back and take a look at what you just said. Whether you actually are a racist, classist douche-bag or not that's how you're coming across.

My point is he does not know how it feels to be a poor black man in a black ghetto first-hand, because he was raised by jet-setting individuals....one of which was legitimately nobility..... And yes, class is also a factor just as race is in the US. Intersectionality and whatnot.

Obama accepted the job but chose not to live among those he would be organizing. Instead, he commuted 90 minutes each way daily from his apartment in Chicago's famous Hyde Park to the Altgeld Gardens housing project where he worked.

Average Black Man?

[Grumman]

You know, when Trayvon Martin was first shot I said that this could have been my son. Another way of saying that is Trayvon Martin could have been me 35 years ago.

This bothers me because unless seventeen year old Obama would make the same choices Martin did, this could not be him thirty-five years ago. Even if Obama does not believe that Martin confronted Zimmerman and threw the first punch, as President he should at least pay lip service to the possibility.

[Thanas]

It doesn't bother me in the slightest. I am not a big fan of Obama as everyone knows but I don't doubt that he too could have been pursued by an overzealous idiot, either got attacked or flipping out and attacking the other guy.

Truth be told, if someone were following me in a car I too would confront them.

[Broomstick]

Second, Obama was not born a millionaire. His upbringing was, at most, middle class and at times probably less than that.

He had a head start in life with being transferred to different positions around the world, similar to 'missionary kids' and 'military brat' subculture. He was in locations where being 'black' mattered less than being 'american' (i.e. Indonesia)

Funny, I wasn't aware of this overwhelming "advantage" conferred by being constantly moved around which makes all "military brat" and "missionary kids" such powerhouse movers and shakers... oh, wait, it doesn't. In fact, it can be very disruptive. Maybe that's why his mom sent him and his sister to live with the grandparents for some stable schooling.

So yeah, he can speak of his experience as an “ordinary” American because up until he became a political superstar that was what he was.

Yeah, Going to Punahou makes you "ordinary", just like having your grandfather get you into a prestigious school right? Note, Punahou is a prestigious school for Hawaiian children of priviledge.

He couldn't possibly have gotten in either via academic merit and/or some financial sacrifice on the part of his family? It's pretty common for such institutions to offer financial aid or scholarships, and at an annual tuition of $19,000/year Panahou is far from the most expensive and exclusive private school in the US. Again, you speak as if parents (or grandparents) trying to secure the best possible schooling for their children are doing something wrong. What, are you the sort that things he either got ahead via "affirmative action" or family string-pulling rather than any effort or talent on his own part? Sure, he had family assistance - just like every other highly successful human being. What, you think no one else in power went to a private school? You know, one of the reasons such schools offer scholarships and financial aid is to give opportunities to kids who aren't rich and privileged.

Your cite points out that both Obama and his sisters received scholarships to the school. It wasn't like grandpa forked over the full tuition for two kids for 8 or so years.

And I'm surprised you don't speak of his years in Indonesia, where his family was more financially well off and privileged than his US relatives.

Finally, while I'm in no way a fan of legacy admissions they do happen. It was through his African father that Obama was a legacy admit to Harvard, after all. If I had had such family connections I would have used them, too. You'd be a fool not to, and I sincerely hope that someone elected to the Oval Office isn't a fool.

In the US he is categorized as a black man, even if everyone knows he's half white. Prior to becoming PotUS he was treated as a black man. That was part of the point of his speech.

I don't think you noticed this, but White Americans are increasingly talking about how he is half white because they I guess want some of his "Swagga" to rub off onto him or something similar. You know, the "don't deny your white half" statements some white parents of 'black' children say.

I guess you missed the part where I said everyone knows he's half white? My point, which clearly sailed over your head, is that someone who didn't know who he was would see him as a black man if he were walking down the street. If you asked any of those people if that man had any other ancestry than African they would also say sure, because he is light-skinned for a black man, but words like "mulatto" and "quadroon" have fallen out of everyday vocabularies and all of those more finely tuned descriptions have been folded into "black".

Frankly, the more whites acknowledge that Obama is half white the better, it gets us further away from the pernicious and toxic "one drop" rule regarding race, but that's not the point here.

So... because he's wealthy now he couldn't have been a poor black child growing up? Did you take your stupid pills before posting that?

No - his entire goddamned childhood was a case of priviledge.

And this is bad because....? Really, is being a poor somehow a requirement for speaking as a black man in the US? He's not authentically black unless he grew up in the ghetto and subsisted on food stamps? Way to perpetuate a stereotype. A man can't be black unless he's poor, uneducated, and speaks the proper dialect, is that what you're saying? Isn't that a slap in the face to every black person in the US who has been financially successful, educated, and learns to speak multiple dialects/languages? That is part of the problem - the successful black folks are invisible when, in reality, they have always existed and should be held up as an alternative example to the drug dealers and gangbangers currently glorified in the entertainment arm of the media.

That is one of the most important achievements of Obama being president - demonstrating that while prejudice and discrimination still exist in the US it is also possible for black people to achieve, succeed, and thrive. The highest political office in the US is now fair game for any black man who is willing to do what it takes to get there, just as it is for any white man. Sure, the black guy is going to have some additional obstacles but the point is that it can be done. It's entirely valid for black men to be highly educated Ivy league graduates, for their wives to be lawyers.

My point is due to his connections he could pretty much guarantee admissions to those magnet schools and whatnot, the same way it happened to him. What is this shit about him being a poor black man? I fell for that shit in 2008 even if I didn't exactly support the candidate then, but now "the emperor has no clothes"

I never said he had been poor, I said middle class, probably more specifically upper middle class. Being from abject poverty is not required to be an authentic black man in the US - see also what Thanas said. It's irrelevant to his point.

My point is he does not know how it feels to be a poor black man in a black ghetto first-hand, because he was raised by jet-setting individuals....one of which was legitimately nobility..... And yes, class is also a factor just as race is in the US. Intersectionality and whatnot.

He wasn't speaking as a specifically poor black man, he was speaking as a "black-man", financial status unspecified because no matter how wealthy and powerful a black man is in the US he is STILL seen as a black-man and is burdened with being threatening merely by being black and male to a substantial portion of the US population. All too many people don't see the fine suit, the wealth, the education, etc. they see black-man, someone that prompts you to lock your door if he's across the street, to clutch your purse if he's in the elevator, to follow with security in case he "does something" or "starts something" in a store.

Obama accepted the job but chose not to live among those he would be organizing. Instead, he commuted 90 minutes each way daily from his apartment in Chicago's famous Hyde Park to the Altgeld Gardens housing project where he worked.

Excuse me? Why would a political organizer be required to live in the projects? Are you fucking serious? You think Jesse Fucking Jackson lives in the projects? Hell no! Yet he's made a career of speaking for the oppressed black man.

Get a clue - most of the people who go into housing projects to try to improve things - social workers, teachers, police, political activists - do not live in those projects. When I worked at a clinic in Chicago literally across the street from Cabrini-Green I didn't live in Cabrini-Green, I lived in Rogers Park. The black social worker I worked for there (among others) didn't live in the projects, she lived in Lincoln Park. Most of the white social workers lived in the close-in suburbs. In other words, you're faulting Obama for being like the majority of other people working in/for the people of housing projects. Double-standard, much?

His entire point, which, again, you clearly missed, is that even privileged black men in the US are treated as potential shoplifters, muggers, and thieves. He is NOT speaking solely for the ghetto resident, he's speaking for every black man in America, including those outside the urban ghetto. His background in no way de-legitimizes his point. If he was dressed in sweat pants and a t-shirt the current PotUS would have difficulty hailing a cab in Chicago, privileged background or no.

[Saxtonite]

Funny, I wasn't aware of this overwhelming "advantage" conferred by being constantly moved around which makes all "military brat" and "missionary kids" such powerhouse movers and shakers... oh, wait, it doesn't. In fact, it can be very disruptive. Maybe that's why his mom sent him and his sister to live with the grandparents for some stable schooling.

Missionary children and military brats & TCKs in general are more educated than the general population and has a larger 'worldview' from going around many places, so there is an advantage from such. Also, they were pretty much in Indonesia so it was not going around with unstable schooling.

He couldn't possibly have gotten in either via academic merit and/or some financial sacrifice on the part of his family? It's pretty common for such institutions to offer financial aid or scholarships, and at an annual tuition of $19,000/year Panahou is far from the most expensive and exclusive private school in the US.

Obama also admitted in the book that his grandfather pulled strings to get him into the school. "There was a long waiting list, and I was considered only because of the intervention of Gramps's boss, who was an alumnus."

Nope. Also, it's one of the most expensive and prestigious in Hawaii.

Again, you speak as if parents (or grandparents) trying to secure the best possible schooling for their children are doing something wrong. What, are you the sort that things he either got ahead via "affirmative action" or family string-pulling rather than any effort or talent on his own part? Sure, he had family assistance - just like every other highly successful human being. What, you think no one else in power went to a private school? You know, one of the reasons such schools offer scholarships and financial aid is to give opportunities to kids who aren't rich and privileged.

My point is that it is disingenuous for him to claim to be poor and whatnot and claim to know all of the struggles when he came from a more privileged life than many of the black population thought he did. Yes, he did work by himself to study/etc in his education. That doesn't mean there is no privilege. Things like oh one of his grandparents being a bank president and inheriting hundreds of thousands of dollars from her and all that.

And I'm surprised you don't speak of his years in Indonesia, where his family was more financially well off and privileged than his US relatives.

The reference to "legitimately nobility" was his stepfather in Indonesia.

I guess you missed the part where I said everyone knows he's half white? My point, which clearly sailed over your head, is that someone who didn't know who he was would see him as a black man if he were walking down the street. If you asked any of those people if that man had any other ancestry than African they would also say sure, because he is light-skinned for a black man, but words like "mulatto" and "quadroon" have fallen out of everyday vocabularies and all of those more finely tuned descriptions have been folded into "black".

They only acknowledged that because he had power and privilege, so they wished to tag along with it. Note the "until I became a senator" he has problems with taxis due to race.

And this is bad because....?

He has no room speaking or claiming to know what it is to be a poor black man in america? It angers some people to hear a rich person claim to know their struggle? Because there is classism in Black America, and historically some of the bourgoeise was annoyingly classist (see: "Jack and Jill" black clubs.

Note that the Bourgoeise black people during Jim Crow originally did no care about poor black people getting lynched because they thought "they deserved it" or that it only happened to poor people. So yes, there is a class based issue which intersects with race, and something which has historically affected blacks in america, often as an internal issue.

Really, is being a poor somehow a requirement for speaking as a black man in the US? He's not authentically black unless he grew up in the ghetto and subsisted on food stamps? Way to perpetuate a stereotype. A man can't be black unless he's poor, uneducated, and speaks the proper dialect, is that what you're saying?

Uh, no.

Also, since you mentioned such: like it or not, most of the black population in the US is descended from slaves and has the collective memory of jim crow and whatnot. Some mixed-race individuals or africans straight out of africa are mathematically the minority of the black population. Even the middle class blacks have that history, a majority of them do.

Isn't that a slap in the face to every black person in the US who has been financially successful, educated, and learns to speak multiple dialects/languages?

No, it's a statement of fact that the majority black population has such origins. Even the immigrant blacks from Jamaica and Haiti.

P.S. being educated and speaking multiple languages is different then someone who came from a life of privilege claiming to know how it feels to be poor and black, when richer black people are given leeway.

That is part of the problem - the successful black folks are invisible when, in reality, they have always existed and should be held up as an alternative example to the drug dealers and gangbangers currently glorified in the entertainment arm of the media.

The Same Media which aires things like this and this which pretty much satirizes/deconstructs Street Culture, Rap Feuds, and urban violence?

Gangsta Rap is pretty dead........

I never said he had been poor, I said middle class, probably more specifically upper middle class.

no

His upbringing was, at most, middle class and at times probably less than that.

Being from abject poverty is not required to be an authentic black man in the US - see also what Thanas said. It's irrelevant to his point.

The "Mainstream" and "Abandoned" are pretty much the majority population. Obama's point is questionable (there is different experiences between those of a rich black and those of a middle class or poor black.)

He wasn't speaking as a specifically poor black man, he was speaking as a "black-man", financial status unspecified because no matter how wealthy and powerful a black man is in the US he is STILL seen as a black-man and is burdened with being threatening merely by being black and male to a substantial portion of the US population. All too many people don't see the fine suit, the wealth, the education, etc. they see black-man, someone that prompts you to lock your door if he's across the street, to clutch your purse if he's in the elevator, to follow with security in case he "does something" or "starts something" in a store.

Yes, that may be true but there are still class based issues Obama might gloss over and which are also internal to the social lives of many african-americans.

Excuse me? Why would a political organizer be required to live in the projects? Are you fucking serious? You think Jesse Fucking Jackson lives in the projects? Hell no! Yet he's made a career of speaking for the oppressed black man.

Well I don't exactly support Jesse fucking Jackson given.....neptoism and corruption (see: his son, Jesse Jackson Jr.). Legislators and representatives are expected to live in the neighborhoods they 'represent', so I would think for example Jesse Jackson might be expected to as well.

Your other statements are accepted though, and I am not 'faulting' him as opposed to saying 'he does not have their experience'.

My counterpoint is that class can be just as much of a factor as race for many black people, and a lot of the classism is not just external but internal. (This relates to someone like OBAMA making such a speech)

[Thanas]

So wait, you are purely objecting on Obama's speech because he did not suffer through a Ghetto upbringing?

[Broomstick]

I guess you missed the part where I said everyone knows he's half white? My point, which clearly sailed over your head, is that someone who didn't know who he was would see him as a black man if he were walking down the street. If you asked any of those people if that man had any other ancestry than African they would also say sure, because he is light-skinned for a black man, but words like "mulatto" and "quadroon" have fallen out of everyday vocabularies and all of those more finely tuned descriptions have been folded into "black".

They only acknowledged that because he had power and privilege, so they wished to tag along with it. Note the "until I became a senator" he has problems with taxis due to race.

When he became a senator he was featured frequently on local TV and thus became instantly recognizable. So a hypothetical cab driver seeing him standing in a suit on a sidewalk on Michigan Avenue is going to recognize him as "Senator Obama", he's no longer an anonymous black man. Both Jesse Jacksons, Louis Farakhan, and the late Harold Washington didn't/don't have much problem getting cabs in Chicago either because they're well known enough to be recognized as individuals. Prior to becoming famous, though, all of them had the same problem.

Because there is classism in Black America, and historically some of the bourgoeise was annoyingly classist

That's hardly a problem limited to the black community. Yet FDR, who unquestionably came from a background of wealth and privilege, became quite the advocate of the poor and downtrodden. While personal experience is valuable one doesn't have to be an actual insider to see and speak of problems within a community.

All of which ignores that the POINT of Obama's speech was race, not poverty although poverty is a co-morbidity with many of the problems of many black Americans at large.

Note that the Bourgoeise black people during Jim Crow originally did no care about poor black people getting lynched because they thought "they deserved it" or that it only happened to poor people.

I suspect it was also a matter of throwing some black people under the bus in hopes the whites would spare a different group of black people.

Allso, since you mentioned such: like it or not, most of the black population in the US is descended from slaves and has the collective memory of jim crow and whatnot. Some mixed-race individuals or africans straight out of africa are mathematically the minority of the black population. Even the middle class blacks have that history, a majority of them do.

Right, which is why some folks were saying stuff like he wasn't really black, or really African-American, or similar things when what they really meant was that he wasn't a descendant of slaves. Nonetheless, Africans who willingly emigrate and their children, mixed race or not, are just as much Americans as anyone else and are just as subject to anti-black prejudice when moving around the landscape. They might not be the descendants of slaves but they are still subject to the after effects of slavery. They don't have a get-out-of-racism card.

It's not like Obama has ever attempted to hide that his father was from Africa and his mother white.

Gangsta Rap is pretty dead........

Please tell that to the young wannabes in my area.

Obama's point is questionable (there is different experiences between those of a rich black and those of a middle class or poor black.)

Obama's point is that even the most successful and powerful of black men has had the experience of being viewed as a threat solely because he is black and male. Or as Chris Rock once pointed out, he's a multi-millionaire but not one busboy in the venue where he was performing, barely managing an existence at crap wages, would be willing to trade places with him.

Yes, that may be true but there are still class based issues Obama might gloss over and which are also internal to the social lives of many african-americans.

The point of that speech was race, not class.

Excuse me? Why would a political organizer be required to live in the projects? Are you fucking serious? You think Jesse Fucking Jackson lives in the projects? Hell no! Yet he's made a career of speaking for the oppressed black man.

Well I don't exactly support Jesse fucking Jackson given.....neptoism and corruption (see: his son, Jesse Jackson Jr.). Legislators and representatives are expected to live in the neighborhoods they 'represent', so I would think for example Jesse Jackson might be expected to as well.

No, representatives are required to live in the districts they represent, at least to the extent of maintaining a residence there even if they don't live there full time. However, thanks to gerrymandering, those districts incorporating the housing projects in Chicago always had a slice of territory in a better neighborhood. For damn sure the Jacksons haven't been living in the projects these past 40 years, they've been living (part time) on the better side of their territory.

My counterpoint is that class can be just as much of a factor as race for many black people, and a lot of the classism is not just external but internal. (This relates to someone like OBAMA making such a speech)

All of which is irrelevant to the point of the speech he made, which was addressing RACE, not CLASS.

[loomer]

So wait, you are purely objecting on Obama's speech because he did not suffer through a Ghetto upbringing?

It's part of critical race theory, where Obama doesn't get to be Black because he's got too much privilege. Thus, he has no right to explain Blacks to Whites - he's White, from a CRT perspective. In fact, he is the epitome of White now, being the President. It's an interesting field of thought, especially when it comes to attacks on prominent people rejected by their own ethnic origins for being 'other', but it's also quite flawed.