As a Conservative, I will openly admit and concede that attempting to attack Barack Obama by saying that he shares whatever views William Ayers has or had 40 years ago, or even by claiming he shares the views of Rev. Wright are misleading. I have many friends and acquaintances who hold views I do not share, some of which I disagree entirely. Even my own father, who is the child of the Great Depression, and in whom I hold the utmost respect, clings to a number of prejudices that were outmoded 30 years ago, and which I do not share.

However, that does not mean that I believe Barack Obama is a man of character. It simply means that judging him based on his associations is futile, unfair, and likely inaccurate.

That Barack Obama is a relative newcomer to the national political scene is no secret and is not refutable. Further, I think that most any person would have to agree that we do not know as much about him and his beliefs as we traditionally have known about candidates for President.

I for one have for some time, and currently remain troubled by the continuing racial tension in this nation. I anticipate that, as the economy continues to be uncertain, old hatred will unfortunately flair back up as political finger-pointing spills over into the social system of this country.

I bring all of this up because there is something about Obama that troubles me deeply. If, for example, a Republican Presidential candidate made statements demonstrating racial prejudice, it is unquestionable that he would be unelectable. In fact, I can think of a number of political candidates and those who held prominent offices being undone because of a racially insensitive statement. For example, consider Trent Lott's comment about Strom Thurmond ("... if he had been elected President, we wouldn't have had all these problems..."). The comment made to direct allusion to race or racial issues; it was inferred that, because Thurmond had taken Segregationist positions during his candidacy in 1948, Lott must have been referring to those policies.

Consider what would happen if it we as Americans discovered that John McCain or Sarah Palin had said any of the following comments:

"I just cannot understand what it is that makes black people so afraid, their demons, the way ideas get twisted around."

What if McCain or Palin described an African-American critic as being a "typical black person"?

What if either of them distinguished their views with that of a white supremacist by stating that they questioned the "effectiveness" but not the "sentiment" of his views?

What if they addressed crimes committed by African Americans as "just the way black people act"?

Can you imagine the outcry? Wouldn't the Congressional Black Caucus, the Rainbow Coalition and the NAACP stage nationwide protests demanding that they withdraw from the race? Wouldn't most of America, regardless of race, line up with them, shaking their heads at the shame that someone with such views could rise to a position such as candidate for President for a major party? Of course they would. And they should.

And yet, Barack Obama has made just those kinds of statements... in fact, he made them, nearly word for word, in his book Dreams from my Father: A Story of Race and Inheritance. Do NOT take my word for it. Here are the quotes, and I encourage - no I BEG you to research it for yourself:

"It's just how white folks will do you. It wasn't just the cruelty involved, I was learning that black people could be mean and then some. It was a particular brand of arrogance, an obtuseness in otherwise sane people that brought forth our better laughter. It was as if whites didn't know they were being cruel in the first place or at least thought you deserving of their scorn. ...

Regarding his reading of the book Heart of Darkness

"I read the book to help me understand what it is that makes white people so afraid, their demons, the way ideas get twisted around." ...

in offering a justification for what he describes as his grandmother's prejudice toward blacks:

"[S]he is a typical white person who if she sees somebody on the street that she doesn't know, you know, there's a reaction that's bred into our experiences"

On the impact that radical Black Nationalism has had on the black community:

"[Black Nationalism provided a]n unambiguous morality tale that was easily communicated and easily grasped: a steady attack on the White race, the constant recitation of black people's brutal experience in this country served as the ballast that could prevent the ideas of personal responsibility [within the black community]".

As he offered an analysis of the Black Nationalist movement, Obama offered this explanation for his objection to it:

"As it turned out, though, it was questions of effectiveness and not sentiment that caused most of my quarrels with Rafiq [al-Shabazz, black nationalist]."

And finally, and perhaps most alarming: Obama has catapulted to the forefront of the National Political Stage and, if polls are to be believed, stands to be elected the next President of the United States. That same polling data reveals that most Americans who indicate support for Obama or who are uncertain regarding their vote nevertheless describe Obama as being personable, sincere, insightful and intelligent. In light of that perception, consider this final quote from his book:

"It was usually an effective tactic, another one of those tricks I had learned. People were satisfied so long as you were courteous and smiled and made no sudden moves. They were more than satisfied. They were revealed. Such a pleasant surprise to find a well-mannered young black man who didn't seem angry all the time." This tactic, in his words, opened doors to him within the system. Obama goes on to state that, because he was able to be courteous and smile, suppress his anger and make no sudden moves, "a consulting house to a multinational corporation agreed to hire me as a research assistant. Like a spy behind enemy lines, I arrived every day at my mid-Manhattan office and sat at my computer terminal."

Now, I fully expect that any Obama supporters who read this will flame me for taking these quotes out of context. Admittedly, these passages are only excerpts from his book, and do not tell the "whole" story he attempts to convey. However, I find myself unable to imagine a context in which the foregoing passages do not belie Obama, who styles himself as a harbinger of change, as nothing more than a very well-spoken, well-mannered and exceptionally intelligent racist. "Context" is a necessary component of the truth - but just as I cannot imagine how Jeremiah Wright could be interpreted in any way other than as a man who hates this country when he screams "not God Bless America, God @#$! America!", I cannot see how Obama's true beliefs can be reconciled with the image he portrays.

With that being said, I welcome - and encourage - any Obama supporter or self-styled "objective independent" to review these passages and even to offer more information from Obama's book to rebut what I have offered.

In fact, I pray that my interpretation of these materials IS wrong. Because if it is not, I am fearful of the kind of "change" Obama may have in mind.

Obama has wrestled publicly and thoughtfully with the racism that still exists in this society. Most of the "damning" quotes you bring up there concern the irrefutable difficulty of being a black person in America today (not to speak of 40 years ago). Obama is an astute observer of society. He's also half black, and so has experienced the impact of race first hand. He knows that viewpoint, but also transcends it. If you think that's a problem, that being able to see things from an African American perspective automatically makes Obama a partisan, unqualified to represent whites, so be it. But consider that he may also be uniquely qualified to help bridge and heal some of the deep race divisions that lie beneath the surface of our nation. A supremacist sympathizer (of any kind) he is not.

He transcends "that viewpoint". What a generous conclusion you draw. Please, by all means, demonstrate his transcendence. Show me how he has "grown" beyond the stereotypical comments he made representing his views, not the views of society or Black America.

I anticipated a flood of apologism, and I suppose it has started. I applaud your ability to keep back the "black people can't be racist" psychosis I've heard so many times before.

But, let's try and focus, shall we? Let's get back to the scenario I offered. Pretend John McCain wrote a book where he just USED the phrase "typical black person" in any context. Try to imagine without weeping the calls for his public hanging.

Now, do your very, very best to resist the arrogant temptation to apply some nonsense double-standard and make a thoughtful, honest, and I would encourage well-reasoned argument supporting Obama's poignant observation that his apparently prejudicial white grandmother feared blacks for no more insidious reason than because she was a "typical white person." Once the headache subsides, please tell me how a man who can view a race as pre-disposed to prejudice can still "represent" them.

I mean, describing his grandmother's fear or hatred as just to be expected from a "typical white person" - that is the sort of comment you make when you experience the "irrefutable difficulty of being a black person in America". You generously and mercifully paint ALL white people with a brush of unfortunate racism?

This issue - and the double-standard that has existed regardng the destruction racism sews - has gone unchallenged long enough. Bottom line - Obama has some explaining to do. Not for the sins of William Ayers or even for Jeremiah Wright. But for the views HE expresses in a book which HE describes as a memoir of HIS viewpoints - views that, if expressed about African Americans by someone who had not had the misfortune of "experiencing the irrefutable difficulty of being a black person" would have spelled the end of his political career.

You have three weeks. I would get started.

You've selected only the quotes that you find most objectionable, and used only that subset of what you say Obama wrote to conclude that he's not a man of character. Is that fair? Was there nothing else he wrote that you found thoughtful or admirable? And be honest, did you read the books entirely, or is it possible that you're only familiar with the "questionable" quotes because you saw them presented in some Obama-bashing web site or email?

As a person who is half white and half black, who spent the first nine months of his existence inside the belly of a white woman, who was largely raised by his white grandparents, I find the insinuation that Obama is a closet racist to be highly questionable. What other "evidence" do you have besides this small and highly selective set of quotes?

texaslawyer, you have that peculiar arrogance that almost every lawyer I know has (I know a ton), the unearned kind (oh noes!!! have I been stereotypical?!). You've read a book a ton of other people have read, have some insights about it, and have spotted everyone three weeks to grapple with your brilliance. Really??

Obama identifies himself as a black person. Black people often have very complex, angry views as a minority that has been, throughout a short history, legally defined as a 3/5 person, sold as chattel, murdered for looking at white women, and forced to drink from separate fountains. Yes, the black people (person?) you know probably hasn't experienced those things, but their culture and tradition is inextricably bound in those hardships. Conservatives dig culture and tradition so you should understand this. They are surrounded by a white society and power structure that forcibly excluded them until recently, and implicitly does do today. So you can imagine they might have some hard-edged, sterotypical things to say about that. Some of it's youth. Some of it's stupid. Some of it's right on. That is not an apology.

Now John McCain can't say stuff like that without controversy because he's a privileged white guy. Sorry. I know conservatives would be giddy as hell to act like every day is a fresh new day and we all should treat each other exactly the same, but that's not the case. I know it's irritating. White people can't ethically do this stuff to black people, Germans can't ethically do this stuff to Jews, Turks can't ethically do this stuff to Armenians. Call it the Ancestor Dickhead Tariff...you get to pay the price for your ancestors' dickhead actions. And what a price it is, huh? As two white guys, I guess we'll just have to console ourselves with our much greater earning power, our ability to catch a cab at 3am, our smaller probability of getting shot or going to prison, our greater life expectancy, all of which I know can never fill the gaping hole that is left when John McCain cannot say stupid shit about black people.

You're a white dude. You won the lottery of life my friend, so don't get so upset when you see someone else find a twenty on the street. Now I don't know what I'll do with the rest of my three weeks you so generously alloted me, but I'll offer one final thought: I'm quite sure you're a lot more intelligent than the post you wrote, but not nearly as intelligent as you think you are.

Hey, fair enough. As I said in the post (assuming you read all the way through it), the selections are presented "out of context". I was comfortable quoting the "questionable" quotes relatively alone because they stand alone and because, in my opinion, there is no conceiveable context which would alter their meaning.

If you disagree, you are charged with more than a platitude about context - if you think I have misrepresented Obama, then you should PUT them IN context, thus exposing me as a hypocrit, not merely postulate that there MIGHT be a proper context. Which you have chosen not to do.

So, let's start with sweeping away the assumptions, and get to the root of what I'm saying.

You accuse me of "insinuating" that Obama is a "closet racist". Well, I'm not insinuating anything. Do I think Obama is a black supremacist? No. Not based on what I've seen. As for whether he is a racist, I suppose that depends somewhat on how you define racism.

If you concept of "racism" is that racism is hating, feeling superior to, or finding flaw with another race of people, especially to the extent that you would actively seek to destroy, disrupt or create turmoil for that race, then no. I don't mean to insinuate that Barack Obama is a card-carrying member of whatever the counterpart to the Klan would be.

On the other hand, if you take the more academic view of racism (which Websters defines as "a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities" or "that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race") then yes, I think these passages indicate that.

It is clear to me from these "quotes" that Obama feels that you can draw certain conclusions about how people will think, act and what motivates them based on their race. "Typical white people" will view blacks with fear. White people expected to find young black men angry and militant, and were "pleasantly surprised" to find a well-mannered balck man, the extent it could be used as an "effective trick". You can try to explain them away if you wish. It's to be expected from someone who views Obama favorably to resist believing that he might be something he isn't. Just remember Shakespeare's warning: "'Tis too much prov'd,--that with devotion's visage and pious action we do sugar o'er
the Devil himself."

Tell you what - assume two things for me. Assume that the quotes were lifted from an "anti-Obama" literature. And assume that the quotes, while out of context, are nevertheless accurate quotes.

Now - answer the question I POSED. Would a white, conservative candidate who made identical comments about black Americans, REGARDLESS of the context, be given the generous benefit of the doubt you assert should be afforded Obama? We both - in fact we all - know that he or she would not. Furthermore, I renew my ORIGINAL conclusion that there IS no "enlightening" context in which these comments could be acceptable. The bottom line is, I don't care how enlightened Obama may be about the nature of race relations, or how insightful he may be on the fundamental fairness of varying social programs - the bottom line is very, very simple - he explained the flawed thinking of his own grandmother by pointing out that it should be expected from a person of her skin color, and that such behavior was "typical". I'm not twisting his words. Those ARE his words. And I would TREASURE the attempt by someone to explain them away.

Rather than doing that, however, you've drawn what I have to say might be the smartest-sounding dumb conclusion I've ever seen in print - that the fact that he's half white means he isn't a racist. Which is, ironically enough, a conclusion that is, itself inherently racist.

To be clear - I am not "insinuating" that Obama is a closet racist. I am producing his own words, his own comments, and his own phrasology that are, in fact, racist. Because, the word "racist" means

So, here's what you should do. Rather than succumb to the logical flaws your friends tell you to and defend against an allegation that is supported with at least some first-party source material with unsupported, speculative and utterly baseless "feelings" about how you "think" the man how about YOU go find some of those thoughtful and admirable things you think I would be embarassed by and just post them right here, right beneath this one. I can't wait to see what counter-balances negative conclusions about a race of people based on their skin color, but hey - life's crazy, right?

Thank you McGeorge. You've supported my position better than even I could have hoped. Rather than attack my position through refutation, you seek to smother it under the weight of empty success.

Please correct me (as I know you will) if I misrepresent your position in any way by attempting to paraphrase it, but if I understand your position, you have no problem accepting my premise that Obama has displayed some racial stereotyping about whites in his book because, basically, he gets to do that because he's a black guy. And white people can't do it - and can't complain about it - because, being that we are white, we already have everything, get everything, and don't appreciate it.

More to the point, drawing negative, overarching conclusions about how a person will behave or how they think based on skin color is ignorant, oppressive and inexcusable if it's a privileged white person doing it, but not only acceptable but the result of a "complex, angry view" which is "inextricably bound to their hardships (visited upon them by the aforementioned privileged white guys)" and therefore insightful and even enlightened if it is a black guy doing it.

Hey, here's a thought - how about you cut the crap? I don't need a lesson in moral superiority from some self-loathing, breast-beating bonehead who feels guilty for things done by other people before he was born and over which he has no control either to prevent or mitigate. You want to take a tongue lashing for the sins of your forebears? Be my guest. Hell, write a check if you feel obliged. As for me? You know nothing about me. My background. Whether my ancestors owned slaves or smuggled them to the north, fought for the North or the South, or immigrated to this country during the Reagan administration. You don't know if I was born with a silver spoon in my mouth or between split shifts at the factory. You don't even know that I'm white, that it matters.

The bottom line is this - you wanna level the playing field? News flash - so do I. This racial animous is poison, and no one wins. And it is not going to end as long as we cut someone a pass when they engage in a thought process that is fundamentally flawed - and anyone who would not only draw conclusions based on racial stereotypes but be STUPID enough to write them in a BOOK and never bother to address their misinterpretation is not the kind of person I want to put in charge of this nation when we are facing three or more of the most serious crises in our history... and ESPECIALLY not when that book makes up a significant percentage of his professional experience as an adult.

If you would like to dismiss my views or my intelligence, I take no offense and feel no slight. As for whether you think I am more or less intelligent than the post I wrote? Perhaps. But I don't think there is any question that you are every bit as intelligent as your post would lead us to believe.

texlaw2k...

By your logic, then, how can any white person represent the black, asian, native people of this country? How can anyone of any one race represent all the other races that make up America? You make no sense.

Hey I know you! You're the guy who thought he hit a home run when he was born on third base!

It's terribly courageous of you to sever yourselves from misdeeds of the past. I did not know you were of such moral fiber, and stand humbly corrected. But while I beat my breast quite frequently, I don't really feel guilty about much (and if I have any guilt, there's nothing "white" about it). People who came before me did some terrible stuff and a lot of groups on the receiving end of it still have some shit to work out. I really need to whine about THAT? It's really hurting me that much? You too?

You see, this is the comic tragedy you propagate. My father killed and raped your father and mother. But hey, that was in the past, I'm my own man. Judge me for who I am. Let's end this racial animus. You see, you want reconciliation on YOUR time, on your terms. Everyday you plug into the planet of wealth and opportunity laid out at your doorstep, arranged by the vicissitudes of human civilization. Nothing to be guilty about... Yet you pull the plug and kick it under the rug whenever someone fairly or unfairly knocks you about it. Cowardice, much?

So OK! You win, you are hereby exempt to be able to say ignorant things about black people in order to fight the scourge of Barack Obama (because THAT'S why Obama's handing McCain his ass right now). If anyone raises a fuss, I'll write them a letter, and we'll explain how you're a New Age Man unconnected to terrors of the past, the ahistorical wonder who willed himself from protozoa to Captain of Industry, not on the back of anyone but on the wings of stick-to-it-iveness. Screw it, let's do one for McCain too. Level playing fields for everyone! Yay!!

I didn't mean to slight your intelligence because I don't believe you are dumb. I just don't believe your insights compel the same level of self-satisfaction that you do. There, I think we are doomed to agree to disagree...

Yes, I fear we are. You seem content to continually pull this thread farther and farther away from the issue that is relevant. You see, MY attitudes are NOT relevant. The man who would be President - his attitudes are.

I should not have taken the bait. I don't care if you beat your breast and gnash your teeth. I don't care what kind of guilt you feel, what color it is, or even if you feel it. I don't really believe that your "insight" about why Obama might feel the way he feels or says he feels or claims he doesn't feel might or might not be justified. Because it doesn't matter if it's justified or not.

What does matter is this: If Obama is a racist, he cannot be President. It doesn't matter how innocent and pure his racism is, how righteous his indignation, or how justified his flawed perceptions. It doesn't matter if racism is reprehensible, morally wrong or unfair, nor does it matter if disqualifying him for understandable views seems unfair. Denying him the office due to racist views is not a punishment for being racist, any more than granting him the office would be a reparation for the wrongs visited on the black community.

He doesnt get to be President because, as President, he has to make important decisions. Complex decisions. Decisions on social, economic, and foreign policy. He has to shepherd the nation through this crisis, and crises yet to come. And the American people cannot afford to have a man in the White House who allows stereotypes about the American people to affect his view of the problem. And no, it doesn't matter if it isn't his fault.

So, attack me. Attack my ideals. Attack my standing, my accomplishments, my unequal opportunities. Blame the inequities of the past for whatever success that has come my way. To your contentment. Attack my "new age" view of bygones for bygones and accuse me of expecting the victim to embrace the son of the murderer. Build your straw army, and burn it with abandon.

Just don't stand here, indignant, and try to yell me down with an argument that it's okay if the President of the United States holds a racist view of the nation just because he happens to be somehow, in your mind, justified. Because that isn't enough.

My original post asserts that Obama's writings reflect a willingness on his part to draw assumptions about the population based on race. I maintain that such a view would be crippling to his ability to serve the nation effectively because it demonstrates that his judgement is flawed. Whether that flaw is his fault or not, the result is the same.

If you wish to redeem Obama's electability in spite of my argument, I expect you to refute the premise - convince the other readers of this thread that Obama, in fact, is NOT a racist, and stop wasting our time trying to justify him if he is.

gotsmartz, I don't think you've actually >read< my post. At no point did I suggest that the fact that Obama is black would somehow render him unable to represent the interests of whites, Asians or any other race. Nor did I say that a President has to be the same race as the people he represents.

I argue that his writings demonstrate that he holds prejudiced views of whites (and, although indirectly, blacks as well) and that such stereotypical reasoning is flawed. In effect, Obama is a racist, in that he seems to believe that he can predict how people will behave based on their race.

If that is the case, he is not fit to be President because he lacks the open-minded judgement necessary to represent the people and understand their issues. I would make the same case if a white supremacist was running for President.

All of this is covered in my original post and the post to which you replied. I would go back and read over them again if you thought I was arguing as you suggest.

Dear fingerpuppet:

Re: "I find the insinuation that Obama is a closet racist to be highly questionable. "

I don't think of Obama as a "closet racist"--I think of him as an open racist. I do not discriminate among the racists and he, surely, is one.

Even based on the quotes that you selected, I just don't see what the fuss is about. Obama noticed that white people can be cruel in an arrogant and obtuse way, even while acknowledging that black people can be mean too. He notices that white people can be fearful -- what, is it a crime or a shame to be fearful? He sympathizes with his white grandmother over her fear of strange black men on the street -- stop the presses! So, given that you're a person who seems to be intent on nailing the case that Obama is some kind of racist, and this is apparently the most compelling evidence you could find, the sparsity and mildness of these quotes (especially when counterbalanced with a plethora of other quotes that would directly refute the notion that Obama is a racist) doesn't seem to amount to very much in my opinion.

And then there's the issue of fairness. You didn't say if you'd even read Obama's books in their entirety. So one has to wonder about the impression that those isolated quotes might have made on you without a more complete picture of the man that might be provided by reading everything he wrote in those books. For example, the following passage (from Obama's speech on race), in my opinion, gives a more nuanced view of his grandmother's attitudes and fears, describing her as . . .

a woman who sacrificed again and again for me, a woman who loves me as much as she loves anything in this world, but a woman who once confessed her fear of black men who passed her by on the street, and who on more than one occasion has uttered racial or ethnic stereotypes that made me cringe.

I'm sorry, but I see only warmth and compassion there, and an honest willingness to grapple with racial issues that many prefer to ignore or deny. You say that you're only using Obama's own words to make your case, but in omitting any "exculpatory evidence," it seems to me that the case you're making is one-sided and dishonest.

In answer to your question about whether someone like McCain could get away with similar statements, I don't know. But getting away with it is a separate issue. The question that matters is, is either McCain or Obama a racist. Even taking into account the McCain campaign's cynical use of racially-tinged imagery to try to portray Obama as alien and scary, I don't believe that McCain himself is a racist. He's just cynical like virtually every Republican presidential candidate since the GOP's "Southern Strategy." In Obama's case, I don't believe he's a racist either. And unlike McCain, I haven't seen any evidence of him trying to exploit any racist sentiments in his supporters. Whether some of McCain's or Obama's supporters might be racists themselves, well, of course they might. But as long as the candidates are quick to denounce any such views and encourage mutual respect and civility, they shouldn't be held responsible for that.

As to whether there might be some asymmetry or unfairness in the way the expression of racial attitudes is handled on television or in the press, well, that's a very complicated issue, and one of the other posters you're debating has done a good job of examining that issue. Whether there is or isn't is really kind of irrelevant. I think that our concern should be about the views of the candidates themselves, since they can't be held responsible for wider attitudes and practices they have no control over.

Why? Because you say so? Or because those viral wingnut emails going around say so? I suspect it was a foregone conclusion in your case, that you want to believe it, and that no evidence to the contrary would matter to you.

Dear fingerpuppet,

Re: "Why? Because you say so? "

Well--you say po-ta-to, I say po-tah-to

The facts don't change. We'll both be eating drek regardless of who is elected. But, at least, I know it in advance.