Voting for Obama because You are Black and He is Black makes you...

Originally posted by chissler
I object to the basic premise of this thread, because if Obama was white and Hillary was a man, none of this would be an issue.

I really do not think you are applying yourself to even understand the premise in this thread, my friend.

Originally posted by chissler
Voting for Obama because he is black is not racism. It is prejudicial, but it is not racism. Racism is about power, not just the act of prejudging.

So, Chissler, you tell me casting a VOTE for office has zero to do with power?

It is by defintion the most power a citizen of a democracy can wield. And as we have seen, it is being abused by those who prefer someone of their colour in office to any other. Intellectual debate didn't enter the equation. It was set from the beginning. Blacks for Obama. As for the semantics of racism vs prejudice, I can agree either way, but essentially you are just splitting hairs.

Originally posted by chissler
If my emphasis as a voter was on education reform, and I cast my vote for someone with a strong platform on my ideals and only that, is that not prejudicial?

You do not comprehend the ignorance of racism. Your example is incomparable. Voting based on policy and voting colour of skin the same? Please.

Originally posted by chissler
Shaming a black man or woman for voting for a black candidate is wrong because nobody shames white voters and white politicians when they ignore the facts.

Identifying a wrong is wrong in itself because there are other wrongs? What kind of logic is that?

Originally posted by biggie smalls
Many women have been quoted in the media supporting Hillary because she's a woman.

I tell you this sickens me equally. However the incidence is far less if you examine the statistics. Obama is taking a majority of young women.

It is unfortunately true that many black people will be voting for Obama based on his skin color. Here in my neighborhood, there are a lot of black people who think its gonna be "handout time" as soon as Obama gets into office.

Most of them will disappointed for sure.

It should be pointed out that not all black people around here will be voting for Obama. There are some around here who would rather see Hilary in office. But they are very few in numbers. Most of them want Obama and they want him for the reason that I stated above.

And please don't accuse me of being a racist for pointing out what I have been able to observe with my own eyes and ears. I am NOT racist.

reply to post by SteveR


I think you're just ticked off because Obama is getting so many votes. If large numbers of African Americans or large numbers of women joined together to vote for the candidate YOU prefer, then I'm sure you wouldn't call them racist or sexist, you would call them intelligent.

A lot of white people get threatened when the African American community comes together behind a person of color. If they were all behind a white candidate there would be no threads like this one.

reply to post by SteveR


The basic concept of racism is escaping you, even if my examples were not spot on. Yes the power of an individual vote is one of the greatest power we as citizens have, but racism is about stripping the power away from an individual. By casting a vote for Obama, how are we stripping power from him? We are not.

Racism is not just the act of prejudging someone based on their race. A key component in what racism is and is not is power. Given the parameters of this discussion, we are not discussing stripping the power away from Obama.

What is being discussed here is prejudice, not racism. Label this splitting hairs, so be it. But there is a big difference, even if you choose not to acknowledge it.

Now I see that a vote for Obama is a vote against Hillary, thus stripping the power from her. But Hillary is a member of the dominant culture in Western society, and thus the recipient of many privileges that Obama is not. Thus, once again; racism does not apply.

Racism is one of the most misunderstood concepts in today's society, but one of the more recognizable ones.

Ironic, really.



[edit on 12-3-2008 by chissler]

PEOPLE, like I said, don't give this thread any credibility!

This is just another pathetic attempt to slander the candidate StevenR doesn't like.

StevenR isn't listening to anyone's arguments, nor does he plan to. He is stuck on the belief that you are racist, or Obama is the antichrist. Trust me, I've debunked his theories before, and he continues to keep going and going with incorrect information.

[edit on 3/12/2008 by bigbert81]

If I vote for Obama, which is a big if, it won't be because he's black, it'll be because I've been swayed to his ideas. Or conversely, if I don't vote for him, it'll be because I don't agree with his ideas, not because he's black.

For every voter that does vote on racial lines, there are many others who don't. To say otherwise is to sell the rest of us short.

reply to post by chissler



Racism, at the core, is a bias however mild or extreme that prefers one race over another regardless.

If we can't agree on that, then we are proselytizing different issues. You may be interested to know there is a second entry in the m-w dictionary that covers 'racial prejudice' as racism... *shrug*

You have read in my posts and heard from others about the admitted emotional preference of Black voters toward Obama becuase of his colour.

This is blatent racism toward Clinton et al and a vain use of a Vote. Once the majority of black voters decided to vote for their "brother" the election became hopelessly corrupted and reason went out of the window. Consider it. If 75-90% of white people voted for a white candidate over a black one (something that ISN'T happening in this election) I am sure black people would be equally up in arms as I am.

Now Ferraro hit a nerve and is paying for the Truth.

A young African American lady told me that she feels the Blacks have been oppressed for so long, and this election is a way for them to fight back! If you do not see the insanity at play here god help you.

[edit on 2008/3/13 by SteveR]

reply to post by SteveR


While I stand in opposition, I do so for discussion purposes.

I do agree with what you are saying and I do agree that it is a problem. And while this may not have occurred in a previous presidential election, I am certain that it has occurred in another American elections for other various positions on the various levels.

Black individuals voting for black candidates due to their skin color is apparently noteworthy. But if a white voter voted for a white candidate, which happens all of the time, nothing would ever be said or questioned. Most times we wouldn't even know, because we wouldn't ask the question.

So while I disagree with a black person voting for Obama strictly on his skin color, I do empathize in the fact that white men and women have been doing it since we could vote.

[edit on 13-3-2008 by chissler]

Given the long and ugly history of slavery, opperssion and discrimination against not only blacks but all ethnic minorities, and women as well it is perfectly understandable that a black or a woman would want to have the chance to vote for the first black or woman president... just as the Irish Catholics were thrilled to vote for Kennedy, or the Mormons would have been voting for Romney, had he gotten the nomination.

Is it logical? No but perfectly understandable.

reply to post by SteveR


I thought you might like Obama's spin on the issue. Maybe he reads ats

Obama: Voters to judge issues, not race

Democrat Barack Obama expressed frustration Wednesday that racial issues keep rising to the top of his presidential battle with Hillary Rodham Clinton, but he said the great majority of voters will base their decisions on substantive issues.

At a news conference, Obama said he feels his primary victories in an array of states have proven he can draw support from all races and regions, and that he is not overly reliant on black voters.

The race/sex card is going to be played again and again in this presidential race.

Originally posted by chissler
So while I disagree with a black person voting for Obama strictly on his skin color, I do empathize in the fact that white men and women have been doing it since we could vote.

Right. However the issue here is best expressed as follows.

92% of Black Mississippi voters choose Obama.

There is a collective psyche at play here that far exceeds your white counterexamples.

Originally posted by SteveR
92% of Black Mississippi voters choose Obama.

And that 92% are strictly voting for him because he is black? Or are you generalizing the actions of some onto the masses? Would that act not be prejudicial in and of itself?

Since the beginning of democracy, white voters have voted for white candidates. It was never noteworthy. Why is it breaking news suddenly when a black man casts a vote for a black candidate?

Why is it wrong for them, and acceptable for us?

Well, let me take a guess; it's not acceptable for us. But yet, nobody ever takes the moment to question it.

Makes you wonder, doesn't it?

This thread is an example of the white privileges that are deep rooted into our society that are daily overlooked.

reply to post by chissler


Your last post is honestly the most rediculous on the entire thread.

You Chissler are far too politically correct for your own good. You speak of 'white privledges' like it is 1960. I suggest you study the issue closer and talk to some of these voters. I have and they are downright frightening. It is no joke that they are voting for Obama to "fight back", against white folks ostensibly.

There is a problem when 92% of Blacks vote Obama to "fight back". Sure, some of them will have made intelligent reasoned decisions that they are all capable of. But when the margin is 92, you know that wasn't the case for the majority.

Where will Chissler draw the line? When a President Obama demands Congress pay reparations for the slave trade and human rights abuses against Blacks? Obama himself may not be inclined to, but his support base is frothing in the mouth at the prospects of "fighting back"!

[edit on 2008/3/13 by SteveR]

reply to post by SteveR


Personal comments are unnecessary.

I know the year is not 1960 and I have researched this subject extensively. Not only does my work have me directly involved with it on a daily basis, but I volunteer in several aspects of my community that involves this widely unrecognized concept. Because you choose to overlook it does not mean it does not exist.

If Obama was white, and I as a white man voted for him blindly, would you have the same knee-jerk reaction and same hostility towards that vote?

Be honest.

Originally posted by SteveR
When a President Obama demands Congress pay reparations for the slave trade and human rights abuses against Blacks? Obama himself may not be inclined to, but his support base is frothing in the mouth at the prospects of "fighting back"!

You are overtly criticizing a black candidate based on an assertion that you yourself refute. Obama may not believe in it himself, but because he is a black man.. he can not be trusted.

Is this what you are saying?

[edit on 13-3-2008 by chissler]

Originally posted by SteveR
Sure it is. Choosing a man over others due to the color of his skin is a definition of racism.

Funny, I looked it up:

rac·ism /ˈreɪsɪzəm/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[rey-siz-uhm] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun 1. a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others.
2. a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.
3. hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.


I'd have to agree with Bigbert on this one. Unless these people are voting out of nothing but hatred or superiority feelings towards whites, this thread and your arguments are bogus.

reply to post by chissler


If Obama was a white man and you voted for him because of your white supremacy and nothing other, I would be inclined to call you a racist, and an instigator of corruption in the democratic process. And I'd be right, as I am now.

Review the second line in my opening post, it was there for a reason and it is truthful.

Why do you insist on being an apologist for the insanity taking place?

Originally posted by QueenIsis
1. a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others.

"One's own race is superior and has the right to rule others."

Sounds a little like the "power" that I had alluded to earlier? Maybe I was onto something there with my definition of racism, Steve.

The subject matter of this thread is not racism, it is prejudice.

Splitting hairs? No. It's basic logic of the terms at hand.



Why do I insist on being an apologist? If that is how you perceive this, then I fully respect your opinion. But I will say that I believe you are wrong. I am merely shedding light on the fact that this has gone on since as long as any of us can remember, and it was never an issue. But now because the individual is black, some people are objecting to a longstanding practice.

Yet these individuals continue to tell themselves that they are not the one who has an issue. When clearly that is the case.

I don't think any of us should sit here and pass judgment on those that we haven't walked in their shoes. I refuse to pass judgment as I am in no position to do so. I weigh the facts, I take the time to research all sides, and I formulate an opinion. On this instance, I am trying to empathize with those that are having judgments past on them.

I continue to get slapped with labels from Steve on this one, and if that's what he insists on doing then that's ok. I'm too "politically correct", an "apologist".. so be it.

I'm not the one who is telling others to change their mind. I'm simply stating my beliefs.

Why you insist on changing the mindset of others is your own business.

[edit on 13-3-2008 by chissler]

Originally posted by chissler
The subject matter of this thread is not racism, it is prejudice.

Since you feel the need to define my thread and my intentions, I will be clear on this point for you. The subject matter is not a word, term, or definition but a real phenomenon of insecure Blacks voting for their colour on the basis of fighting back. Fighting against Whites when there is NO fight in reality obviously incurs a reverse racism. Call it whatever you want to. That is what I want to discuss, not semantics.

If your nerves are being hit, it is best to bow out, really.

Thanks.

reply to post by SteveR


Now here, I'd have to agree with Chissler.

Fighting against Whites when there is NO fight in reality obviously incurs a reverse racism.

I think this quote just goes to show everyone how truly naive your arguments are.

Obviously you have never been down south, or been a black man. This is one of the most ridiculous things I think I've ever seen anyone say.

I see some African Americans itchy to make a retaliation have arrived on the threads, plural.

Your behavior only hardens my opinion of your community. You are doing yourself no favors. Conduct yourselves in an adult manner and perhaps we can both listen.