OK, but ask any light skinned black man if he's considered black by others.
I used to buy into this stuff until one night at work I was shocked out of my senses ..stunned was more like it by one of my co workers.
He told me that one of the women with whom he was very much in love ...her mother did not like him because he was to dark. I was stunned about
this. I had never heard such a thing. I was taught that black was black. I never knew or thought about any other concept.
Then some years later I learned what was meant by the term red boned. Again I was stupified in what I was hearing. Who was more skin oriented??
Some folks just cannot get over skin colour. I weary of hearing it being so promoted as a default setting. Like this computer ..it just tends to
default through. What is worse and becomeing obvious to me is that many groups are socially preying on this pattern of default settings to promote
thier causes at the expense of others. This cycle is become a cottage industry for many in this country. People are begining to weary of it and speak
out against it.
I am no longer in this type of naivety. I have long since left this type of thinking behind me. I treat people as I would want to be treated...but I
dont have much use for the kind of thinking proposed by the OP here.
However ...if they want to use that criterion...black... as a reason to vote for a candidate ..it is not up to me. I just expect more from a candidate
than the colour of their skin.
It is obvious to me that the OP has little tolerance for dissenting opinions while expecting tolerance from others. This is not a good pattern or
fingerprint to promote a belief system...even a political belief system. Not tolerating dissenting opinions to the point of foul language or
violating the T&C also hints at a type of entitlement mentality...ie...a default setting to play through unquestioned or undebated. I point this out
as a way of saying that it reflects on this partys political fingerprint...and that thinking people can notice this and connect the dots...right to
the entitlement beliefs.
Demandred makes an excellent point here.
couple that with the fact that he is unable to handle any personal critisism and he becomes a very poor choice for one of the most
critisised jobs on the planet.
It is indeed one of the most criticized offices on the planet. If all one can fall back on is Race Victimization ..it is not going to cut it in this
office. Nor is Sex Victimization.
I too think that Obama is alot of show...or showmanship. We have already had a number of such Presidents.
I am also wondering if like Bill and Hillary...we are not getting two for the price of one. Who or Whom are we really voting for here. This is just
how I think.
I am also thinking to myself if this is the new template for the office of President of the United States in the years to come?? We are or will be
also voting for thier wives??? Or in the case of Hillary and Bill for her husband??
Will there be more throwing of stuff around the White House during domestic bliss. This ground too was already covered by previous
On this same subject..will there be a total shake up of the secret service?? Again???
Conversely..MY opinion of the other candidate is that Bill is way to big a liability to enter the White House as a First Male. I dont see this
Conversely...will we acually be voting for him if we vote for Hillary?? See what I mean?? Again ..here ..shake up of the Secret Service?? This
fingerprint will be very telling of much. Watch closely for this one....
Are any of you connecting the dots yet??
As to the Republican Candidate...I am not impressed at all with McCain. Once again we seem to be at the same impass with poor choices all around.
You know...one would think that as many times as there have been Presidents..we would at least by pure accident, get even one candidate which is
clearly leaps and bounds above and beyond the others in candidate potential. But it doesnt seem to happen. Dont you folks see this as strange??
Some random thoughts here for all to muse upon,