President Obama's Inauguration Speech

[Roxie]

My fellow citizens:

I stand here today humbled by the task before us, grateful for the trust you have bestowed, mindful of the sacrifices borne by our ancestors. I thank President Bush for his service to our nation, as well as the generosity and cooperation he has shown throughout this transition.

Forty-four Americans have now taken the presidential oath. The words have been spoken during rising tides of prosperity and the still waters of peace. Yet, every so often the oath is taken amidst gathering clouds and raging storms. At these moments, America has carried on not simply because of the skill or vision of those in high office, but because we the people have remained faithful to the ideals of our forebears, and true to our founding documents.

So it has been. So it must be with this generation of Americans.

That we are in the midst of crisis is now well understood. Our nation is at war, against a far-reaching network of violence and hatred. Our economy is badly weakened, a consequence of greed and irresponsibility on the part of some, but also our collective failure to make hard choices and prepare the nation for a new age. Homes have been lost; jobs shed; businesses shuttered. Our health care is too costly; our schools fail too many; and each day brings further evidence that the ways we use energy strengthen our adversaries and threaten our planet.

These are the indicators of crisis, subject to data and statistics. Less measurable but no less profound is a sapping of confidence across our land — a nagging fear that America's decline is inevitable, and that the next generation must lower its sights.

Today I say to you that the challenges we face are real. They are serious and they are many. They will not be met easily or in a short span of time. But know this, America — they will be met.

On this day, we gather because we have chosen hope over fear, unity of purpose over conflict and discord.

On this day, we come to proclaim an end to the petty grievances and false promises, the recriminations and worn out dogmas, that for far too long have strangled our politics.

We remain a young nation, but in the words of scripture, the time has come to set aside childish things. The time has come to reaffirm our enduring spirit; to choose our better history; to carry forward that precious gift, that noble idea, passed on from generation to generation: the God-given promise that all are equal, all are free and all deserve a chance to pursue their full measure of happiness.

In reaffirming the greatness of our nation, we understand that greatness is never a given. It must be earned. Our journey has never been one of shortcuts or settling for less. It has not been the path for the faint-hearted — for those who prefer leisure over work, or seek only the pleasures of riches and fame. Rather, it has been the risk-takers, the doers, the makers of things — some celebrated but more often men and women obscure in their labor, who have carried us up the long, rugged path towards prosperity and freedom.

For us, they packed up their few worldly possessions and traveled across oceans in search of a new life.

For us, they toiled in sweatshops and settled the West; endured the lash of the whip and plowed the hard earth.

For us, they fought and died, in places like Concord and Gettysburg; Normandy and Khe Sahn.

Time and again these men and women struggled and sacrificed and worked till their hands were raw so that we might live a better life. They saw America as bigger than the sum of our individual ambitions; greater than all the differences of birth or wealth or faction.

This is the journey we continue today. We remain the most prosperous, powerful nation on Earth. Our workers are no less productive than when this crisis began. Our minds are no less inventive, our goods and services no less needed than they were last week or last month or last year. Our capacity remains undiminished. But our time of standing pat, of protecting narrow interests and putting off unpleasant decisions — that time has surely passed. Starting today, we must pick ourselves up, dust ourselves off, and begin again the work of remaking America.

For everywhere we look, there is work to be done. The state of the economy calls for action, bold and swift, and we will act — not only to create new jobs, but to lay a new foundation for growth. We will build the roads and bridges, the electric grids and digital lines that feed our commerce and bind us together. We will restore science to its rightful place, and wield technology's wonders to raise health care's quality and lower its cost. We will harness the sun and the winds and the soil to fuel our cars and run our factories. And we will transform our schools and colleges and universities to meet the demands of a new age. All this we can do. And all this we will do.

Now, there are some who question the scale of our ambitions — who suggest that our system cannot tolerate too many big plans. Their memories are short. For they have forgotten what this country has already done; what free men and women can achieve when imagination is joined to common purpose, and necessity to courage.

What the cynics fail to understand is that the ground has shifted beneath them — that the stale political arguments that have consumed us for so long no longer apply. The question we ask today is not whether our government is too big or too small, but whether it works — whether it helps families find jobs at a decent wage, care they can afford, a retirement that is dignified. Where the answer is yes, we intend to move forward. Where the answer is no, programs will end. And those of us who manage the public's dollars will be held to account — to spend wisely, reform bad habits, and do our business in the light of day — because only then can we restore the vital trust between a people and their government.

Nor is the question before us whether the market is a force for good or ill. Its power to generate wealth and expand freedom is unmatched, but this crisis has reminded us that without a watchful eye, the market can spin out of control — and that a nation cannot prosper long when it favors only the prosperous. The success of our economy has always depended not just on the size of our gross domestic product, but on the reach of our prosperity; on our ability to extend opportunity to every willing heart — not out of charity, but because it is the surest route to our common good.

As for our common defense, we reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals. Our founding fathers, faced with perils we can scarcely imagine, drafted a charter to assure the rule of law and the rights of man, a charter expanded by the blood of generations. Those ideals still light the world, and we will not give them up for expedience's sake. And so to all other peoples and governments who are watching today, from the grandest capitals to the small village where my father was born: know that America is a friend of each nation and every man, woman, and child who seeks a future of peace and dignity, and that we are ready to lead once more.

Recall that earlier generations faced down fascism and communism not just with missiles and tanks, but with sturdy alliances and enduring convictions. They understood that our power alone cannot protect us, nor does it entitle us to do as we please. Instead, they knew that our power grows through its prudent use; our security emanates from the justness of our cause, the force of our example, the tempering qualities of humility and restraint.

We are the keepers of this legacy. Guided by these principles once more, we can meet those new threats that demand even greater effort — even greater cooperation and understanding between nations. We will begin to responsibly leave Iraq to its people, and forge a hard-earned peace in Afghanistan. With old friends and former foes, we will work tirelessly to lessen the nuclear threat, and roll back the specter of a warming planet. We will not apologize for our way of life, nor will we waver in its defense, and for those who seek to advance their aims by inducing terror and slaughtering innocents, we say to you now that our spirit is stronger and cannot be broken; you cannot outlast us, and we will defeat you.

For we know that our patchwork heritage is a strength, not a weakness. We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus — and non-believers. We are shaped by every language and culture, drawn from every end of this Earth; and because we have tasted the bitter swill of civil war and segregation, and emerged from that dark chapter stronger and more united, we cannot help but believe that the old hatreds shall someday pass; that the lines of tribe shall soon dissolve; that as the world grows smaller, our common humanity shall reveal itself; and that America must play its role in ushering in a new era of peace.

To the Muslim world, we seek a new way forward, based on mutual interest and mutual respect. To those leaders around the globe who seek to sow conflict, or blame their society's ills on the West — know that your people will judge you on what you can build, not what you destroy. To those who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing of dissent, know that you are on the wrong side of history; but that we will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist.

To the people of poor nations, we pledge to work alongside you to make your farms flourish and let clean waters flow; to nourish starved bodies and feed hungry minds. And to those nations like ours that enjoy relative plenty, we say we can no longer afford indifference to suffering outside our borders; nor can we consume the world's resources without regard to effect. For the world has changed, and we must change with it.

As we consider the road that unfolds before us, we remember with humble gratitude those brave Americans who, at this very hour, patrol far-off deserts and distant mountains. They have something to tell us today, just as the fallen heroes who lie in Arlington whisper through the ages. We honor them not only because they are guardians of our liberty, but because they embody the spirit of service; a willingness to find meaning in something greater than themselves. And yet, at this moment — a moment that will define a generation — it is precisely this spirit that must inhabit us all.

For as much as government can do and must do, it is ultimately the faith and determination of the American people upon which this nation relies. It is the kindness to take in a stranger when the levees break, the selflessness of workers who would rather cut their hours than see a friend lose their job which sees us through our darkest hours. It is the firefighter's courage to storm a stairway filled with smoke, but also a parent's willingness to nurture a child, that finally decides our fate.

Our challenges may be new. The instruments with which we meet them may be new. But those values upon which our success depends — hard work and honesty, courage and fair play, tolerance and curiosity, loyalty and patriotism — these things are old. These things are true. They have been the quiet force of progress throughout our history. What is demanded then is a return to these truths. What is required of us now is a new era of responsibility — a recognition, on the part of every American, that we have duties to ourselves, our nation, and the world, duties that we do not grudgingly accept but rather seize gladly, firm in the knowledge that there is nothing so satisfying to the spirit, so defining of our character, than giving our all to a difficult task.

This is the price and the promise of citizenship.

This is the source of our confidence — the knowledge that God calls on us to shape an uncertain destiny.

This is the meaning of our liberty and our creed — why men and women and children of every race and every faith can join in celebration across this magnificent mall, and why a man whose father less than sixty years ago might not have been served at a local restaurant can now stand before you to take a most sacred oath.

So let us mark this day with remembrance, of who we are and how far we have traveled. In the year of America's birth, in the coldest of months, a small band of patriots huddled by dying campfires on the shores of an icy river. The capital was abandoned. The enemy was advancing. The snow was stained with blood. At a moment when the outcome of our revolution was most in doubt, the father of our nation ordered these words be read to the people:

"Let it be told to the future world ... that in the depth of winter, when nothing but hope and virtue could survive...that the city and the country, alarmed at one common danger, came forth to meet (it)."

America, in the face of our common dangers, in this winter of our hardship, let us remember these timeless words. With hope and virtue, let us brave once more the icy currents, and endure what storms may come. Let it be said by our children's children that when we were tested we refused to let this journey end, that we did not turn back nor did we falter; and with eyes fixed on the horizon and God's grace upon us, we carried forth that great gift of freedom and delivered it safely to future generations.

[harper]

Certainly much better than his oath of office :)

I had CNN on in my class from about 15 minutes before the oath of office up through the end of his speech.

[Jetsetlemming]

tl;dr

[Citizen]

tl;dr

This.

[Roxie]

The type size of each word below represents the number of times Barack Obama used the word in his inauguration speech.
The larger the word, the more times it was used in the speech. (Based on prepared text.)

http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b58/Roxie21/image_8240065.jpg

[bluestars87]

Geez what a day. I just wish my grandmother could have seen it. Still can't believe it.

[Trump]

I cannot believe there were people who sat and watched the inaguration coverage all day. I was tired of them saying the same things over by 7:30 when I turned off the TV and went to work.

[Roxie]

I cannot believe there are people who got tired of such a momentous day.

[Swede]

The type size of each word below represents the number of times Barack Obama used the word in his inauguration speech.
The larger the word, the more times it was used in the speech. (Based on prepared text.)

http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b58/Roxie21/image_8240065.jpg

.... Why didn't they just list them -_-

That pretty much doesn't say anything :-/

[Roxie]

I didn't know you hated pretty things Swede.
http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b58/Roxie21/11647762.gif

[Citizen]

I cannot believe there are people who got tired of such a momentous day.

It wasn't even a particularly good inauguration. The entire thing left a bad taste in my mouth. The shitty music and loser celebrities, the messed up oath (only half Obama's fault, I know, but Christ), the needless and shameless booing of Bush, the lukewarm speech, and then of course there's the worst part of all, which actually disgusted me; the fact that the ceremony was wrapped up with a racist speech by a racist man, and for some reason the crowd didn't come together as one and boo his race baiting, card playing ass off the stage. If I were Obama I would have put a stop to that. Racism during the inauguration of the president of the United States of America in 2008? No thanks.

It was a twisted pop culture mockery of an inauguration. Plus as far as I'm concerned, the most momentous day when it comes to electing a new president is election day. So I can easily see how people could have gotten tired of inauguration day.

Unless of course you're basing your statement on his skin color, in which case there's really no way anything I say is going to reach you, and I feel kinda sorry for you.

[Plekto]

Still, who gives a damn about the party and celebration(such as it was) when there's work to be done?

[Jetsetlemming]

and then of course there's the worst part of all, which actually disgusted me; the fact that the ceremony was wrapped up with a racist speech by a racist man, and for some reason the crowd didn't come together as one and boo his race baiting, card playing ass off the stage.
Was this the guy who's speech was basically "If it's yellow, let it mellow, if it's brown... uh, yay. White needs to get its act together"
I heard the clips of him talking on the radio and the morning show I was listening to instantly jumped to potty humor from it. Awesome stuff.

[Citizen]

Was this the guy who's speech was basically "If it's yellow, let it mellow, if it's brown... uh, yay. White needs to get its act together"

Yup. The only positive thing to come from that shameless display is that it made me want a Mello Yello (and I got one, too!).

[Roxie]

It wasn't even a particularly good inauguration. The entire thing left a bad taste in my mouth. The shitty music and loser celebrities, the messed up oath (only half Obama's fault, I know, but Christ), the needless and shameless booing of Bush, the lukewarm speech, and then of course there's the worst part of all, which actually disgusted me; the fact that the ceremony was wrapped up with a racist speech by a racist man, and for some reason the crowd didn't come together as one and boo his race baiting, card playing ass off the stage. If I were Obama I would have put a stop to that. Racism during the inauguration of the president of the United States of America in 2008? No thanks.

It was a twisted pop culture mockery of an inauguration. Plus as far as I'm concerned, the most momentous day when it comes to electing a new president is election day. So I can easily see how people could have gotten tired of inauguration day.

Unless of course you're basing your statement on his skin color, in which case there's really no way anything I say is going to reach you, and I feel kinda sorry for you.
We clearly didn't see the same inauguration.

[Citizen]

No, we probably did. The difference is just that I see him as our 44th president (you know, the important part) and not as our first black president. Unless of course my suspicions are wrong, but... I kinda doubt that. Perhaps you would care to explain why you thought it was such a great inauguration?

[Swede]

I didn't know you hated pretty things Swede.

I don't hate much of anything. That picture just seems a bit pretentious and doesn't look like it took, well, any effort at all. I'm all about art, just not when it doesn't have anything to say, and the "prettiness" of it is three colors on a black backdrop :meh:

[stsparky]

It's a working day today. The inauguration was just pomp. Bottom line - Bush bailed, and Cheney left in a wheelchair looking like Doctor Strangelove. The nation is better for having a politician who doesn't treat us like idiots.
"Obama should authorize a fleet buy of 5K hybrid vehicles from each Big 3 US automaker as paid w/ our bailout money."

[Roxie]

It wasn't even a particularly good inauguration. The entire thing left a bad taste in my mouth. The shitty music and loser celebrities,The music wasn't shitty and the celebrities weren't losers. They may not have been all my favorite people, but they were not losers.

the messed up oath (only half Obama's fault, I know, but Christ), People get nervous and mess up! It's human, geeze. the needless and shameless booing of Bush,Needless/shameless? Your opinion...but I could go with maybe tasteless. However, that's the crowd for you. You can't really control 2.5 million ppl the lukewarm speech, WHAT? and then of course there's the worst part of all, which actually disgusted me; the fact that the ceremony was wrapped up with a racist speech by a racist man, and for some reason the crowd didn't come together as one and boo his race baiting, card playing ass off the stage. If I were Obama I would have put a stop to that. Racism during the inauguration of the president of the United States of America in 2008? No thanks.
I had to really research to see what in the heck you were referring to. You mean the, "when white will embrace what is right." line? So this line that you interpret as racist isn't simply a racist act to you, it makes the man who has spent his life fighting for civil rights here, against apartheid in South Africa, and signed the United Methodists of Color for a Fully Inclusive Church Statement to include LGBT people--is a racist person?

[Roxie]

I don't hate much of anything. That picture just seems a bit pretentious and doesn't look like it took, well, any effort at all. I'm all about art, just not when it doesn't have anything to say, and the "prettiness" of it is three colors on a black backdrop :meh:
Ah, I see. I really like the font, actually.

[Fermented Yeast Paste]

No, we probably did. The difference is just that I see him as our 44th president (you know, the important part) and not as our first black president. Unless of course my suspicions are wrong, but... I kinda doubt that. Perhaps you would care to explain why you thought it was such a great inauguration?
The significance of it, from the historical to the fact that it's Bush being replaced by hopefully someone who shows promise to be a much better president, among other things. The speech itself was pretty damn good and included his usual rhetoric and oratory skills but also brought up the problems facing our country in a realistic manner. The events after the actual inauguration (Parade and such) were just plain ol' fun. The poem recited by the elderly black man was just humorous and I think you're just trying to be offended by it.

I'm not sure I see anything about the speech that could make it come off as lukewarm to anybody unless they purposely tried to find things about it to not like about it.

[Citizen]

People get nervous and mess up! It's human, geeze.

A fucked up oath is a fucked up oath. Can't really change that. I hope you felt the same when Bush would stumble, though.

Needless/shameless?

Yes, without question.

You can't really control 2.5 million ppl

The people running crowd control aren't the ones at fault; the shameless, disrespectful people in the crowd are.

I had to really research to see what in the heck you were referring to. You mean the, "when white will embrace what is right." line? So this line that you interpret as racist isn't simply a racist act to you, it makes the man who has spent his life fighting for civil rights here, against apartheid in South Africa, and signed the United Methodists of Color for a Fully Inclusive Church Statement to include LGBT people--is a racist person?

You had to really research the closing poem? And no, I'm not saying that that line in particular was racist; I'm saying that the entire poem was racist. It was just more Jesse Jackson/Al Sharpton-style race baiting. It doesn't help anyone, regardless of their race. I don't need to "intepret" it as racism; it is racism. And when someone gets up on stage in front of millions of people and does something racist, then yes, I would have to say that makes that person a racist, regardless of their past.

But more importantly, you still haven't really told me why you thought the inauguration was so great, aside from Obama's speech. Or is it mainly just that? Works for me if it is, I'm just curious.

The poem recited by the elderly black man was just humorous and I think you're just trying to be offended by it.

Racism is so cute when it rhymes and comes from an elderly black man. =^.^=

I'm not sure I see anything about the speech that could make it come off as lukewarm to anybody unless they purposely tried to find things about it to not like about it.

You seem to have confused "lukewarm" with "bad" or "wrong." There wasn't anything in particular not to like about it, I just didn't find it particularly interesting or moving. Obama himself has given better speeches.

[Roxie]

You had to really research the closing poem? And no, I'm not saying that that line in particular was racist; I'm saying that the entire poem was racist. It was just more Jesse Jackson/Al Sharpton-style race baiting. It doesn't help anyone, regardless of their race. I don't need to "intepret" it as racism; it is racism. And when someone gets up on stage in front of millions of people and does something racist, then yes, I would have to say that makes that person a racist, regardless of their past.
I really am even more confused now. He quote part of "Lift Every Voice and Sing" and then he parody a pretty famous (or not as famous as I thought) rhyme about race. He acknowledges race and therefor, he is racist?

If you're white, you're right
If you're yellow, you're mellow
If you're brown, stick around
And if you're black, get back.

His was a play on those words and the saying is more about institutions than individuals.
more importantly, you still haven't really told me why you thought the inauguration was so great, aside from Obama's speech. Or is it mainly just that? Works for me if it is, I'm just curious.
I went down to Centennial Olympic park with thousands of other people and stood in the numbing cold to see it all happen. We were all together. Laughing, cheering, clapping, screaming, snapping photos, smiling. All sorts of people of all ages. That alone is great.

The music (Aretha Franklin! Yoyo Ma! John Williams!) was superb. The speech was really fantastic (especially considering other inauguration speeches). It was short, very well done. Definitely had some "Yes!" moments and I felt was very appropriate. Lowery's benediction was funny and heartfelt. The weeMichelles were so cute and Michelle looked beautiful. Bush left. It was great!

Wait..I just realized how you want to ignore the race of Obama as not being of any significance, yet you're very upset about the racism you perceive in Lowery's benediction?

I don't even need any salt cause that is so damn delicious.

[Citizen]

I really am even more confused now. He quote part of "Lift Every Voice and Sing" and then he parody a pretty famous (or not as famous as I thought) rhyme about race. He acknowledges race and therefor, he is racist?

Quote this rhyme? I've never heard it. I called him a racist because I've never heard whatever he's supposedly parodying, and without that as context, it just sounded like old school race baiting to me. And, well, if you don't think race baiting makes someone a racist... yeah.

I went down to Centennial Olympic park with thousands of other people and stood in the numbing cold to see it all happen. We were all together. Laughing, cheering, clapping, screaming, snapping photos, smiling. All sorts of people of all ages. That alone is great.

Works for me.

Wait..I just realized how you want to ignore the race of Obama as not being of any significance, yet you're very upset about the racism you perceive in Lowery's benediction?

I don't even need any salt cause that is so damn delicious.

Being of a race and being a racist are two different things, I'm afraid. That salt wouldn't do you much good. Obama himself has done his best to avoid making an issue out of his race, because he's intelligent enough to know that the part about him being president is the important part, which I greatly respect him for.

[Citizen]

Damn you and your edits.

Well now I know. What an awful poem (the original version).

[SlickWilly440]

I didn't watch the Inauguration speech yesterday and don't plan on watching it. What do you think of that?

[haterllnation]

I watched it and all the rest, too (the 10 dances at the 10 different balls and the parade). Ha, you could tell they didn't have much to talk about (CNN repeated a lot...well, most media does). The nail in the coffin was talking to Jason Wu, the designer of Michelle's dresses. I had to laugh at that one. I was with family or else I would have changed the channel after Obama was sworn in or at least after the parade.

Obama interrupted Roberts and Roberts messed up the words. It wasn't a big deal, but hopefully, it ends there.

[bluestars87]

the messed up oath (only half Obama's fault, I know, but Christ)
It was John Roberts who solely made the mistake. He thought he could memorize the entire 35 word oath by himself and messed up. Obama actually memorized the oath. He paused and smiled because he was waiting for Roberts to correct himself. He didn't want to correct the Chief of Justice and embarrass him.

You seem to have confused "lukewarm" with "bad" or "wrong." There wasn't anything in particular not to like about it, I just didn't find it particularly interesting or moving. Obama himself has given better speeches.

Are you of African American heritage? Perhaps if you were you'd understand the significance. A black president of the United States 40 years ago was unthinkable. To have come this far in so little time is a big step. It gives optimism to the nation in terms of how we're evolving socially and willing to accept people based on their ideals and not judge them on stupid things like their skin color. People fought hard with literally their very own lives to make drastic changes so that something like this could one day happen in this country. That is why the event is so important. It wasn't necessarily about the celebrities, amount of people, or in my opinion Obama's speech. He's definitely had better ones. However like I said the reality that this actually happened was why it was so special. And that's a good reason to celebrate.

[Swede]

It was John Roberts who solely made the mistake. He thought he could memorize the entire 35 word oath by himself and messed up. Obama actually memorized the oath. He paused and smiled because he was waiting for Roberts to correct himself. He didn't want to correct the Chief of Justice and embarrass him.

Yeah, pretty sure this was it.

[Citizen]

It was John Roberts who solely made the mistake. He thought he could memorize the entire 35 word oath by himself and messed up. Obama actually memorized the oath. He paused and smiled because he was waiting for Roberts to correct himself. He didn't want to correct the Chief of Justice and embarrass him.

What about the part where Obama pre-empted Roberts before he finished saying one of the lines? Also, if he was simply waiting for Roberts to correct himself, why did he begin the line in the first place?

Are you of African American heritage? Perhaps if you were you'd understand the significance. A black president of the United States 40 years ago was unthinkable. To have come this far in so little time is a big step. It gives optimism to the nation in terms of how we're evolving socially and willing to accept people based on their ideals and not judge them on stupid things like their skin color. People fought hard with literally their very own lives to make drastic changes so that something like this could one day happen in this country. That is why the event is so important. It wasn't necessarily about the celebrities, amount of people, or in my opinion Obama's speech. He's definitely had better ones. However like I said the reality that this actually happened was why it was so special. And that's a good reason to celebrate.

Why are you responding to my opinion of his speech with something not about his speech? I'm confused as to where the connection is. Furthermore, implying that someone has to be of a certain race to fully grasp something is pretty ignorant. And in terms of how the concept of a black president was viewed 40 years ago, MLK Jr. didn't consider it "unthinkable." I do agree that we've come a long way in a short time and that that's a very good thing, though.

[Fermented Yeast Paste]

Roberts even said himself that the flub was his fault so just move on, guys. Can't blame a guy who normally works as a judge for getting a bit nervous when speaking in front of millions.

[Roxie]

Damn you and your edits.

Well now I know. What an awful poem (the original version).
Actually, it's not. It's a rhyme from an old blues song. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ZLw5ahxm-Q)

[Jetsetlemming]

Actually, it's not. It's a rhyme from an old blues song. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ZLw5ahxm-Q)
Just because it's old doesn't make it good. Just look at Sparky.

[ミュー]

There sure are a lot of contrarian twats these days.

Coverage proceeding to the inauguration was playing on the hype. News networks have to feed their children too, eh.

The invocation was some of the most polished, shiny Christianity I've ever heard in my life. I did not like his mention of Israel, it will not help relations.

Aretha Franklin was Aretha Franklin. I was satisfied.

The oath was fumbled by the justice, who said two lines to Obama at once. Who cares? It doesn't change anything except for Presidential trivia.

The speech was awesome. If you are an American, I think you should watch the speech. It was inspiring, written in a tone very familiar to most Americans, and had a strong and positive message. His use of the Washington quote in lieu of coining some cheesy catchphrase was especially admirable in my mind.

The poem wasn't my thing. I grew up around a lot of poetry, and I am very opinionated. Not my style at all, but then again but most poetry isn't.

The preacher's rhyme was awesome. I think so-called 'Black church' preachers are a lot more entertaining than their white counterparts. I'm not a Christian, but white people make for some booring Sunday services. Having that bit of heritage in the inauguration pleased me.

After that it was like 2:30 and I was too drunk and tired to continue watching. I woke up the next day an hour late to class with a headache and a positive image of our new president.

[Kai]

I saw everyone pretty much glued to the tv at work during the Inauguration speech. I personally didn't watch it and don't plan to. Saw various clips of it on the news and that was enough.

[bluestars87]

What about the part where Obama pre-empted Roberts before he finished saying one of the lines? Also, if he was simply waiting for Roberts to correct himself, why did he begin the line in the first place?

Roberts himself plus every other news station on television even mentioned that it was his mistake. Coincidence? I think not. Obama may have pre-empted his speech, but that still doesn't mean he messed up the oath, as in not remembered the words correctly. And your last sentence literally does not make sense. He paused, smiled, and waited for Roberts to correct himself which did. What are you talking about?

Why are you responding to my opinion of his speech with something not about his speech? I'm confused as to where the connection is. Furthermore, implying that someone has to be of a certain race to fully grasp something is pretty ignorant. And in terms of how the concept of a black president was viewed 40 years ago, MLK Jr. didn't consider it "unthinkable." I do agree that we've come a long way in a short time and that that's a very good thing, though.

Now you're putting words into my mouth. I never said that you had to be of a certain race to comprehend something. I said that if you were of a certain heritage, then perhaps it may have more significance to you. Those are two totally different things. Even if that wasn't the case, it isn't ignorant to say that experiencing something instead of just observing it is ignorant. That's illogical.

And Martin Luther King Jr. was one person out of the entire United States. And the earliest he said that he would think a black president could be a reality was twenty years, not the present time in which he was active. You think if a black candidate wanted to run for office in the late 1960's that his own party would have even nominated him? Seriously how far would he really get? America simply had different views back then, and this is a fact.

As for quoting your statement about Obama's speech, you're right there isn't any direct connection. However, I've read pretty much you're entire rant about the day's events, which for some reason you decided to pick out every negative thing you could think of for some strange reason and talk about it like it was really necessary in the first place. This is particularly why I didn't think it was too much of a big deal in terms of which quote I decided to talk to you about.

[Roxie]

Just because it's old doesn't make it good. Just look at Sparky.
IT'S NOT ACTUALLY A POEM!

[japanat]

I didn't realize people actually watched inaugurations.

I generally watch the swearing-in ceremony only, and that on the news digest. Being 14 hours ahead, I'm certainly not going to stay up until the middle of the night to hear a politician's short speech with hours of CNN drivel before and after (not even a politician I voted for, and whose term I've awaited with great anticipation). The rest is the same as watching the after-Oscar parties to me - not interesting. If I were actually there I might feel differently, but...

[Roxie]

The actual inauguration wasn't very long at all.
It was the before and after pomp that took forever.

[KAIZOKUx]

What about the part where Obama pre-empted Roberts before he finished saying one of the lines? Also, if he was simply waiting for Roberts to correct himself, why did he begin the line in the first place?



Why are you responding to my opinion of his speech with something not about his speech? I'm confused as to where the connection is. Furthermore, implying that someone has to be of a certain race to fully grasp something is pretty ignorant. And in terms of how the concept of a black president was viewed 40 years ago, MLK Jr. didn't consider it "unthinkable." I do agree that we've come a long way in a short time and that that's a very good thing, though.

Obama Retakes Oath of Office After Roberts' Mistake (http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/01/21/obama.oath/index.html)

Technically, Citzen here is right. If you read this CNN article it shows line by line what happened. YES, Roberts fucked up but he claims he was thrown off because Obama pre-empted him. Roberts should have finished the entire line but as you see Obama began speaking which threw him off and then he fumbled his next line.

" On Tuesday, Roberts, apparently working without a copy of the oath handy on the Capitol steps, started out by reciting a six-word phrase, but Obama broke in halfway through and repeated the first three.

That seemed to throw the chief justice off stride, and he proceeded to mix up the order of the words in the next phrase...."

So...THEY BOTH FUCKED UP. But guess what? It doesn't make a difference because he re-toke the oath so now it's all said and done.

[bluestars87]

Obama Retakes Oath of Office After Roberts' Mistake (http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/01/21/obama.oath/index.html)

Technically, Citzen here is right. If you read this CNN article it shows line by line what happened. YES, Roberts fucked up but he claims he was thrown off because Obama pre-empted him. Roberts should have finished the entire line but as you see Obama began speaking which threw him off and then he fumbled his next line.

" On Tuesday, Roberts, apparently working without a copy of the oath handy on the Capitol steps, started out by reciting a six-word phrase, but Obama broke in halfway through and repeated the first three.

That seemed to throw the chief justice off stride, and he proceeded to mix up the order of the words in the next phrase...."

So...THEY BOTH FUCKED UP. But guess what? It doesn't make a difference because he re-toke the oath so now it's all said and done.

That shouldn't have thrown him off when Obama spoke first. Because there was a one second delay of silence after the first line Obama spoke and then Roberts started again...with "That I will execute the office of President to the United States faithfully" but messed up. When Roberts finished his second line Obama was repeating that second line, then stalled in the middle and looked at Roberts with a smile basically giving him a look "You mixed up the words". I'd say Roberts made the bigger blunder, but that's just my personal opinion.

[Jetsetlemming]

IT'S NOT ACTUALLY A POEM!
:karate: Fuck rhymes!

Regardless, it's pretty messed up for the guy to be quoting a Jim Crow era song on racial issues as if it was modernly applicable, phrasing it as his wishes for the future. If you're black get back and oh by the way we just elected a black man to the leader of the free world.
Also I'd like to know who the fuck the song's referring to as brown. I can't think of a single brown people that was accepted in the 50's in the south.

[Jetsetlemming]

http://www.philly.com/inquirer/opinion/20081109_White_guilt__Done__over__history.html

Lol

[Roxie]

:karate: Fuck rhymes!

Regardless, it's pretty messed up for the guy to be quoting a Jim Crow era song on racial issues as if it was modernly applicable, phrasing it as his wishes for the future. If you're black get back and oh by the way we just elected a black man to the leader of the free world. I suggest you go google what was actually said by Lowery, b/c that wasn't it. He was playing OFF the song, a sort of parody.

Also I'd like to know who the fuck the song's referring to as brown. I can't think of a single brown people that was accepted in the 50's in the south.You are truly confused. Brown is brown. People who are not "high yellow" or "red bone" but brown.


Here are about 50 HQ pictures (http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2009/01/the_inauguration_of_president.html) taken during the ceremonies. A few are from satellites.

[Jetsetlemming]

I only heard part of it on the radio amidst potty jokes, sorry :shobon:

[Samurai_Pooh]

Did anyone else find the inauguration kind of...anticlimactic? maybe it was because I was expecting it for so long, but then it was done, over.

WHY ISN'T THE WORLD PERFECT?! I WAS PROMISED CHAAAANGE

[stsparky]

Just because it's old doesn't make it good. Just look at Sparky.
I'm old and very good. I'm thrilled I'm older than this President. Perhaps you'd want me to dance on your grave? It can be arranged.

[Trump]

Momentous? Let me tell you what has been momentous about this event...

This was the first mistake in the presidential oath in how many elections? That's pretty momentous, but it doesn't really matter.

For me, this is the really momentous bit... It has made me realize how divided by race this country really is. It has proved the whites are less racist than I thought and supported the election of a black president. However, as shown by the hundreds of thousands of people who *only* showed up because Obama is black, that the blacks are still very racist. Historic? Sure, it was historic because he is our first black president. However, the fact that these people would NOT have come to support a white democratic president really shows you what is going on. People are excited because he is black, not because his policies have a better chance of fixing the nation's problems than any other candidate.


Well, you really want to know what else was momentous about that day? It was 30 degrees plus a 30mph wind that night in Orlando, that's pretty momentous. And frankly, I care more about the weather right now than I do about some ridiculous media fest of an inaguration. What he does in office is 1000x more important than that day and yet there is comparitively no news on it. Go go American priorities....

So what does this leave me to be excited about? The fact that inaguration is over, no bombs went off in DC, and the weather is getting warmer.

[Jetsetlemming]

I'm old and very good. I'm thrilled I'm older than this President. Perhaps you'd want me to dance on your grave? It can be arranged.
Sparky: "Oh hey. Someone made a joke at my expense on the internet. What shall I do? I know, I WILL THREATEN VIOLENCE"

:duh:

[Plekto]

For me, this is the really momentous bit... It has made me realize how divided by race this country really is. It has proved the whites are less racist than I thought and supported the election of a black president. However, as shown by the hundreds of thousands of people who *only* showed up because Obama is black, that the blacks are still very racist.

It has always been about class and money. Not really about race. This was true in the French Revolution and and also in the U.S. As each new group of immigrants and people in the U.S. has gained influence and status, it has ceased to be a real issue. For that group.

There was a time when the Irish were treated like trash or given a rough treatment by society. Then the Chinese. Then people from Mexico. If you notice, it's not the fact that they are the new group so much as it's that the first generation or two of any new group of immigrants lacks the social and political power. They tend to be poorer. And poor people in this society are treated like trash by those in power, almost universally. We worship capitalism and money in this country and if you or your group don't have any, you're nobody as a result. At least in a broader cultural sense.

Now, true, hundreds of years of subjugation and racism against black people in the U.S. has had the same effect. Most black people are still less educated and less wealthy than they would otherwise be. But it's changing.

Now, the question is which group will be next? What happens when there aren't any new immigrant groups to use as a scapegoat for our society's feelings of inadequacy and self loathing?

[Samurai_Pooh]

Sparky: "Oh hey. Someone made a joke at my expense on the internet. What shall I do? I know, I WILL THREATEN VIOLENCE"

:duh:

internet.

serious business.

[stsparky]

Sparky: "Oh hey. Someone made a joke at my expense on the internet. What shall I do? I know, I WILL THREATEN VIOLENCE" :duh:
Really? I was thinking your snarky attitude to everything simply means you'll meet an untimely end long before I do. I was referring to this video (http://www.nbc.com/Saturday_Night_Live/video/clips/dont-look-back-in-anger/280236/) I forgot you're too damn young to know about. As the video feed is broken — this describes it: Belushi starred in a short film by SNL writer Tom Schiller called "Don't Look Back In Anger", where he plays himself as an old man visiting the graves of his former cast members and reveals that the reason he's still alive is because he's a dancer. He then proceeds to dance on the other cast members' graves. but I doubt you'd understand the irony.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3496/3218739658_72f5551c39.jpg
Ron Wood's famous portrait of John Belushi ...
----
Back on topic - who other than the grownups know why Gays sport the Rainbow flag? Here's your hint:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5e/Rev_jesse_jackson.jpg

And a Black president has been an idea for a while. Now it's real.

[archdukezeb]

Momentous? Let me tell you what has been momentous about this event...

This was the first mistake in the presidential oath in how many elections? That's pretty momentous, but it doesn't really matter.

For me, this is the really momentous bit... It has made me realize how divided by race this country really is. It has proved the whites are less racist than I thought and supported the election of a black president. However, as shown by the hundreds of thousands of people who *only* showed up because Obama is black, that the blacks are still very racist. Historic? Sure, it was historic because he is our first black president. However, the fact that these people would NOT have come to support a white democratic president really shows you what is going on. People are excited because he is black, not because his policies have a better chance of fixing the nation's problems than any other candidate.


Well, you really want to know what else was momentous about that day? It was 30 degrees plus a 30mph wind that night in Orlando, that's pretty momentous. And frankly, I care more about the weather right now than I do about some ridiculous media fest of an inaguration. What he does in office is 1000x more important than that day and yet there is comparitively no news on it. Go go American priorities....

So what does this leave me to be excited about? The fact that inaguration is over, no bombs went off in DC, and the weather is getting warmer.

I love your logic. All the whites voted for him because they looked past his race and liked him for who he is but all the blacks who voted for him did so only because he's black. Then out of the millions of people who showed up for the inauguration we can assume that all the white people who showed up did so because they like the man but all the blacks who showed up did so because he's black. But even taking out the black people who showed up a record breaking number of people would've been there but somehow this proves that whites aren't racist while blacks are very racist.

Is it fair to assume that every inauguration previous to this all the white people showed up because a white guy was getting sworn in?

[Fermented Yeast Paste]

Words
Trump you are an ignorant child.

[Roxie]

Is it fair to assume that every inauguration previous to this all the white people showed up because a white guy was getting sworn in?
And what about all those black people who voted for all those white presidents?

[Trump]

Roxie... holy crap. Stop putting words in my mouth and actually listen yourself for a change.

All the whites voted for him because they looked past his race and liked him for who he is but all the blacks who voted for him did so only because he's black.
I NEVER said that. Did I mention whites... EVER??? Furthermore, If you look I said hundreds of thousands, not millions. Estimates over 2 million? (though, if that number is different I'd change my number too) So I didn't even mention half, or less a quarter... You are the one who is saying I lump everyone together. Do I need to start saying it like this "1/4 of the blacks showed up because he was black, 1/2 because he was a democrat, and 1/4 just to laugh at the crazy people"??? Is that really how I need to talk to you? Or can you read what I say and not make crazy inferences because as a white male you want to hate what I am...

Here's what I see. Many people in the crowd were crying, celebrating, etc, to a level that far exceed what would normally happen for a presidential election. The only exception I would grant is to the few people who were closely related to the president (by blood or occupation, etc). Have you seen any images of those emotional people being white? If so, I might have a different opinion. Now, what conclusion would YOU draw?

And we can talk about that group of kids from the Atlanta school who came up with a song. They got on the internet and were a hit. They got a free ride to the capital! Ask yourself, do you honestly believe that if they were white they would have been that kind of hit and gotten that kind of privelage? Or if the new president had not been black? Seriously, if you had arguments to the contrary about any of this, I'd listen. I'd reconsider my views. I'd do more research. But all I get from you is "you don't like what is going on so you are wrong and should be hated!!". Come on... offer something to this that is more than emotional nonsense.

Still, don't get me wrong, I love seeing people happy, but the reason makes me sad. It really bugs me when people around me fall into this emotional high and really blow things out of proportion. Was it a great inauguration? No, it was average but with higher attendance than usual. Was it a great speech? No, but it was OK and it came from a good speaker. But the news, and people like Roxie go and blow this thing into "momentous" proportions. Yet you can't understand how I got tired of it?? What world do you live in!!???

I think my problem is that I'm optomistic. I like to believe that most people don't care about race any more. I keep hoping that this new president will do things right and fix things. Yet so many things I see and so many things I read keep telling me my hopes are in vain.

PS, at least I'm old enough that I do not care about my post count.

[Trump]

It has always been about class and money. Not really about race. This was true in the French Revolution and and also in the U.S. As each new group of immigrants and people in the U.S. has gained influence and status, it has ceased to be a real issue. For that group.

There was a time when the Irish were treated like trash or given a rough treatment by society. Then the Chinese. Then people from Mexico. If you notice, it's not the fact that they are the new group so much as it's that the first generation or two of any new group of immigrants lacks the social and political power. They tend to be poorer. And poor people in this society are treated like trash by those in power, almost universally. We worship capitalism and money in this country and if you or your group don't have any, you're nobody as a result. At least in a broader cultural sense.

Now, true, hundreds of years of subjugation and racism against black people in the U.S. has had the same effect. Most black people are still less educated and less wealthy than they would otherwise be. But it's changing.

Now, the question is which group will be next? What happens when there aren't any new immigrant groups to use as a scapegoat for our society's feelings of inadequacy and self loathing?

In a different post to remove it from that other "discussion".

It is an interesting point. So do you think class plays any role in this? I mean, Obama is the same class as all the other politicians, yet he seems to be received differently. The supporters of affirmative action would surely have you believe blacks still have different class status though. So does class play a role?

And another thing to consider, is that your cause and effect is backwards? Does a class of people lack social and political power as a result of people wanting to have someone to hate, someone lower on the chain than they are? Like the Jews during the Holocaust? I mean they had the money and the influence, yet they were a small group and easy to hate so they were reduced to less than human. So it can't all be about money and power can it?

[Citizen]

KAIZOKUx already took care of the first part.

Now you're putting words into my mouth. I never said that you had to be of a certain race to comprehend something. I said that if you were of a certain heritage, then perhaps it may have more significance to you.

You implied (key word; see: "Perhaps") that I would be better equipped to "understand" (your own word) the significance if I were black, not that it would simply be more significant to me, which is what you've changed your argument to. And those are indeed two different things.

it isn't ignorant to say that experiencing something instead of just observing it is ignorant

What?

And Martin Luther King Jr. was one person out of the entire United States.

Martin Luther King Jr. and his many supporters.

You think if a black candidate wanted to run for office in the late 1960's that his own party would have even nominated him?

Depends on the party. Not a main party, obviously.

However, I've read pretty much you're entire rant about the day's events, which for some reason you decided to pick out every negative thing you could think of for some strange reason and talk about it like it was really necessary in the first place.

Dissmissing something you disagree with as being a rant is quite boorish. I'm sorry, but I prefer to have discussion in a discussion thread. I found it "necessary" to post because I had something to say and wished to add to the discussion. You don't need to be pro-Obama to have and state an opinion on OP9. Granted, I'm not anti-Obama; I just found the inauguration underwhelming, and wished to state my opinion on it.

[Plekto]

In the U.S., most of the issues like antisemitism and so on are brought over from abroad and infect things here. But since the nation itself is barely over 200 years old, it's really a matter of the most recent group of newcomers being the runt of the litter and getting kicked around. Those who fit into the power structure are largely immune to it after a generation or two. Those who refuse to embrace cultural assimilation are largely left out.

It's not about having someone to hate(though that does work) so much as the age-old established people who have theirs and who want to keep as much of it from the new people on the scene. Greed and self-preservation are seen as good things in our society. New (and poor) people make wealthy people fearful not only of the new culture and ways of being but also of there being less to go around.

Of course, this is wrong, since the more people that the U.S. has, the more money *everyone* makes as a result. But it's hard to unlearn ingrained pre-industrial revolution habits. It's not feudalism, after all. The more everyone works, the more everyone wins. But try to tell that to the politicians and wealthy.(though they may be listening NOW, since it's clear what 10-12% unemployment does to the economy)

As for Obama, he's really not in the same class as "black America". He was raised outside of it almost entirely and has not a single relative who went through that experience, either. He's really a half-foreigner (Kenyan-American) Not someone who is descended from slaves.

But it IS amazing to see how the black community in the U.S. is wrongly trying to latch onto his coat tails. I think they are in for a rude surprise when almost nothing changes. They see him as "black"(in a cultural sense) but Obama himself doesn't. Not really.

[Fermented Yeast Paste]

As for Obama, he's really not in the same class as "black America". He was raised outside of it almost entirely and has not a single relative who went through that experience, either. He's really a half-foreigner (Kenyan-American) Not someone who is descended from slaves.

But it IS amazing to see how the black community in the U.S. is wrongly trying to latch onto his coat tails. I think they are in for a rude surprise when almost nothing changes. They see him as "black"(in a cultural sense) but Obama himself doesn't. Not really.
What the hell is this? Because he isn't descended from slaves that means he's not actually black in whatever cultural sense you're talking about? And he's not "really" a half foreigner and I'm not even sure where you got that from because he's simply an American, period.

And I'm pretty sure that in one of his books Obama has written about how he considers himself black, so you're wrong.

[archdukezeb]

I NEVER said that. Did I mention whites... EVER???

It has proved the whites are less racist than I thought and supported the election of a black president.


Hmm.

[Roxie]

Roxie... holy crap. Stop putting words in my mouth and actually listen yourself for a change.
What're you even talking about? I didn't put any words in your mouth. I stated my opinion. I might've been replying to your point, but I wasn't replying to you. I was replying to archdukezeb.

To try and pretend that electing our FIRST non-white president, when just a generation ago we were drinking out of separate water fountains isn't momentous is just dishonest and dumb.

[bluestars87]

You implied (key word; see: "Perhaps") that I would be better equipped to "understand" (your own word) the significance if I were black, not that it would simply be more significant to me, which is what you've changed your argument to. And those are indeed two different things.You're still confused. What I basically said to you before was a suggestion, not an order. It's like the difference between asking and telling someone something. I don't see why that's so hard for you to understand. You can claim that I minced words all I want (which really doesn't make sense because that entire angle is subjective anyways) but the bottom line is that I told you one thing and you made a mistake implying that I said something else.



What?
Experiencing something and observing something is not the same. Do you understand this?


Martin Luther King Jr. and his many supporters.Okay? You just took that sentence out of context. Martain Luther King Jr. and his many supporters what? That they together thought that there could be a black president in the next twenty years? How does that add to what we originally were debating about which was my response to your statement of And in terms of how the concept of a black president was viewed 40 years ago, MLK Jr. didn't consider it "unthinkable."
which never even happened since the earliest he mentioned was twenty years at the time.


Depends on the party. Not a main party, obviously. Well for any person to become president it would have to be through a main party. Whether or not MLK Jr. thought it was realistic or not (even though like I said there isn't any evidence implied that he thought there could be a black president at the time) a black president back in those days was not practical. Which is why this gathering was so special for people of African American heritage...who have really only had the rights they were supposed to be entitled to since 1968. While the majority of the other people in the United States (people of Caucasian heritage) have had those same rights for over 300 years. The ceremony represents change in the self-righteousness of people on this planet. That we have taken a step forward since the days of the Civil Rights. Why in the world would you want to be so negative about that?

Dissmissing something you disagree with as being a rant is quite boorish. I'm sorry, but I prefer to have discussion in a discussion thread. I found it "necessary" to post because I had something to say and wished to add to the discussion. You don't need to be pro-Obama to have and state an opinion on OP9. Granted, I'm not anti-Obama; I just found the inauguration underwhelming, and wished to state my opinion on it.

So you admit that you had nothing better to do than to post mindless negativity about the day's events? Let's try another approach. Is there anything you thought was good about the ceremony?

[bluestars87]

Hmm.
Haha, darn you beat me to it.

[bluestars87]

Roxie... holy crap. Stop putting words in my mouth and actually listen yourself for a change.


I NEVER said that. Did I mention whites... EVER??? Furthermore, If you look I said hundreds of thousands, not millions. Estimates over 2 million? (though, if that number is different I'd change my number too) So I didn't even mention half, or less a quarter... You are the one who is saying I lump everyone together. Do I need to start saying it like this "1/4 of the blacks showed up because he was black, 1/2 because he was a democrat, and 1/4 just to laugh at the crazy people"??? Is that really how I need to talk to you? Or can you read what I say and not make crazy inferences because as a white male you want to hate what I am...

Here's what I see. Many people in the crowd were crying, celebrating, etc, to a level that far exceed what would normally happen for a presidential election. The only exception I would grant is to the few people who were closely related to the president (by blood or occupation, etc). Have you seen any images of those emotional people being white? If so, I might have a different opinion. Now, what conclusion would YOU draw?

And we can talk about that group of kids from the Atlanta school who came up with a song. They got on the internet and were a hit. They got a free ride to the capital! Ask yourself, do you honestly believe that if they were white they would have been that kind of hit and gotten that kind of privelage? Or if the new president had not been black? Seriously, if you had arguments to the contrary about any of this, I'd listen. I'd reconsider my views. I'd do more research. But all I get from you is "you don't like what is going on so you are wrong and should be hated!!". Come on... offer something to this that is more than emotional nonsense.

Still, don't get me wrong, I love seeing people happy, but the reason makes me sad. It really bugs me when people around me fall into this emotional high and really blow things out of proportion. Was it a great inauguration? No, it was average but with higher attendance than usual. Was it a great speech? No, but it was OK and it came from a good speaker. But the news, and people like Roxie go and blow this thing into "momentous" proportions. Yet you can't understand how I got tired of it?? What world do you live in!!???

I think my problem is that I'm optomistic. I like to believe that most people don't care about race any more. I keep hoping that this new president will do things right and fix things. Yet so many things I see and so many things I read keep telling me my hopes are in vain.

PS, at least I'm old enough that I do not care about my post count.
So you're basically ticked because people are celebrating a monumental step in the ethics of people and how far we've come in a short time. Yes that's perfectly logical.

And most people in this country don't care about race as much as they once did. The fact that we have a president of African heritage proves that. Hello! What are you complaining about? Seriously?

[bluestars87]

In the U.S., most of the issues like antisemitism and so on are brought over from abroad and infect things here. But since the nation itself is barely over 200 years old, it's really a matter of the most recent group of newcomers being the runt of the litter and getting kicked around. Those who fit into the power structure are largely immune to it after a generation or two. Those who refuse to embrace cultural assimilation are largely left out.

It's not about having someone to hate(though that does work) so much as the age-old established people who have theirs and who want to keep as much of it from the new people on the scene. Greed and self-preservation are seen as good things in our society. New (and poor) people make wealthy people fearful not only of the new culture and ways of being but also of there being less to go around.

Of course, this is wrong, since the more people that the U.S. has, the more money *everyone* makes as a result. But it's hard to unlearn ingrained pre-industrial revolution habits. It's not feudalism, after all. The more everyone works, the more everyone wins. But try to tell that to the politicians and wealthy.(though they may be listening NOW, since it's clear what 10-12% unemployment does to the economy)

As for Obama, he's really not in the same class as "black America". He was raised outside of it almost entirely and has not a single relative who went through that experience, either. He's really a half-foreigner (Kenyan-American) Not someone who is descended from slaves.

But it IS amazing to see how the black community in the U.S. is wrongly trying to latch onto his coat tails. I think they are in for a rude surprise when almost nothing changes. They see him as "black"(in a cultural sense) but Obama himself doesn't. Not really.
The fact that Obama is of African heritage period is something special. Whether he's from America or not. Obama even stated that it may take a couple of terms before significant change happens, assuming it does. As for people seeing him as "black", I'll just say a quote from Collin Powell which is really pretty much straight-forward:

"Look if you walk down the street and look like I do with my skin tone, you're going to be viewed as black".

[Citizen]

Experiencing something and observing something is not the same. Do you understand this?

Yes, I was just making sure. The sentence you typed was so grammatically incorrect that it meant something else altogether.

Okay? You just took that sentence out of context. Martain Luther King Jr. and his many supporters what? That they together thought that there could be a black president in the next twenty years? How does that add to what we originally were debating about which was my response to your statement of And in terms of how the concept of a black president was viewed 40 years ago, MLK Jr. didn't consider it "unthinkable."
which never even happened since the earliest he mentioned was twenty years at the time.

I never mentioned a specific timeframe to begin with. I simply stated that MLK did not consider a black president to be an unthinkable concept.

Why in the world would you want to be so negative about that?

I don't remember ever once being negative in regards to civil rights or the advancement of black people in general. Just the actual inauguration ceremony, not any of the concepts which you've choosen to attatch to it.

So you admit that you had nothing better to do than to post mindless negativity

Now you're putting words in my mouth, and using more boorish, pseudo-intellectual tactics. "Mindless negativity"? Please. The fact that you don't agree with my opinion on the inauguration does not make it mindless. I assure you it's no more mindless or pointless than you own opinion on the matter, nor do I have any less right to state it in this discussion thread than anyone else.

Is there anything you thought was good about the ceremony?

Yes, of course. The fact that our 43rd president was replaced by our 44th, who will, hopefully, do a better job than the 42nd and 43rd did. It was also nice to see people happy rather than protesting.

[bluestars87]

Yes, I was just making sure. The sentence you typed was so grammatically incorrect that it meant something else altogether.

Ahh sorry you couldn't see past a simple typo. Well at least you understand what I meant now that I've explained it to you. What's done is done.



I never mentioned a specific timeframe to begin with. I simply stated that MLK did not consider a black president to be an unthinkable concept.


What you said in full on post number thirty when replying to my statement:

And in terms of how the concept of a black president was viewed 40 years ago, MLK Jr. didn't consider it "unthinkable."

Hmmm...

And before you state that you still didn't establish it, you're right you didn't. I did, but the fact that you ran your reply off of my statement (where the key point is in your reply) shows that you were clearly on the same page I was talking about and you said it as clear as day that MLK Jr. forty years ago didn't think a black president was unthinkable in the late 1960's.

Now you're putting words in my mouth, and using more boorish, pseudo-intellectual tactics. "Mindless negativity"? Please. The fact that you don't agree with my opinion on the inauguration does not make it mindless. I assure you it's no more mindless or pointless than you own opinion on the matter, nor do I have any less right to state it in this discussion thread than anyone else.

No I'm not. I'm making an assumption on what you said and what it means. Not telling you that you said something that was actually said. There is a difference. And this really doesn't have anything to do with your obligation to state something on the forum. Just because I challenge what you said and imply, not say, that it has negative connotations that really aren't necessary in my opinion.

Yes, of course. The fact that our 43rd president was replaced by our 44th, who will, hopefully, do a better job than the 42nd and 43rd did. It was also nice to see people happy rather than protesting.

Hmm...I wonder why you didn't feel the need to state that before. You didn't have a problem stating what you didn't like...

[Citizen]

What you said in full on post number thirty when replying to my statement:

And in terms of how the concept of a black president was viewed 40 years ago, MLK Jr. didn't consider it "unthinkable."

Hmmm...

And before you state that you still didn't establish it, you're right you didn't. I did, but the fact that you ran your reply off of my statement (where the key point is in your reply) shows that you were clearly on the same page I was talking about and you said it as clear as day that MLK Jr. forty years ago didn't think a black president was unthinkable in the late 1960's.

Went back and reread. Found the problem. At the time of my original response, I had mistaken your comment as relating the to way people in the 1960s felt about the concept of a black president in general, rather than during that specific period of time.

No I'm not. I'm making an assumption on what you said and what it means. Not telling you that you said something that was actually said. There is a difference. And this really doesn't have anything to do with your obligation to state something on the forum. Just because I challenge what you said and imply, not say, that it has negative connotations that really aren't necessary in my opinion.

So when I make assumptions on what I perceive to be implications in your posts, it's putting words in your mouth, but when you do the same to my posts, you're not putting words on my mouth? Even when you make a statement such as "So you admit that you had nothing better to do than to post mindless negativity"? Not only does that statement claim that I had made an admission of "mindless negativity," it also claims that I made an admission to having "nothing better to do," neither of which are remotely close to what I said, nor true. How is that not putting words in my mouth?

Hmm...I wonder why you didn't feel the need to state that before. You didn't have a problem stating what you didn't like...

It just seemed pretty well established that Bush being replaced is a good thing and that the inauguration was a happy event. I'm not a big fan of restating what other people have already said. That's part of the reason why I don't make many posts; in any given thread, everything I'd want to say has usually already been dealt with.

[bluestars87]

So when I make assumptions on what I perceive to be implications in your posts, it's putting words in your mouth, but when you do the same to my posts, you're not putting words on my mouth? Even when you make a statement such as "So you admit that you had nothing better to do than to post mindless negativity"? Not only does that statement claim that I had made an admission of "mindless negativity," it also claims that I made an admission to having "nothing better to do," neither of which are remotely close to what I said, nor true. How is that not putting words in my mouth?
Except my assumption was in the form of a question. I wasn't making a statement as if it were fact. I was inquiring/assuming. You were making a statement as factual. Factual as in I definitely said something with no doubts or misunderstand as to what I was trying to convey:

Furthermore, implying that someone has to be of a certain race to fully grasp something is pretty ignorant.

[Firefly]

Have you seen any images of those emotional people being white? If so, I might have a different opinion. Now, what conclusion would YOU draw?

Just because there isn't images of it in the paper or on the internet doesn't mean it hasn't happened. It just happens to be that YOU haven't seen it. Doesn't make it the reality.

Still, don't get me wrong, I love seeing people happy, but the reason makes me sad. It really bugs me when people around me fall into this emotional high and really blow things out of proportion. Was it a great inauguration? No, it was average but with higher attendance than usual. Was it a great speech? No, but it was OK and it came from a good speaker. But the news, and people like Roxie go and blow this thing into "momentous" proportions. Yet you can't understand how I got tired of it?? What world do you live in!!???


I [personally] think Bush leaving office is enough reason to celebrate.

[Roxie]

I [personally] think Bush leaving office is enough reason to celebrate.
Heck yes.

[Jetsetlemming]

Accusing black people of being racist for voting for Obama is pretty rich. If you've ever dealt with racism before, you know that as bad as someone might hate someone from another group, worse still is when one of "ours" and one of "theirs" hooks up and makes a combo baby. America didn't just elect a black man, it elected a biracial man. There isn't any racist of any sort that wouldn't be offended as hell by Obama's makeup. Honestly, the only way he could be a MORE positive show of modern America is if he was also gay.

[Roxie]

And Jewish...or these days Muslim.

[Fermented Yeast Paste]

And if he used to be a woman.

[bluestars87]

Accusing black people of being racist for voting for Obama is pretty rich. If you've ever dealt with racism before, you know that as bad as someone might hate someone from another group, worse still is when one of "ours" and one of "theirs" hooks up and makes a combo baby. America didn't just elect a black man, it elected a biracial man. There isn't any racist of any sort that wouldn't be offended as hell by Obama's makeup. Honestly, the only way he could be a MORE positive show of modern America is if he was also gay.
The funny thing about this is that Obama didn't even win the popular vote. Hilary did. And black people haven't had anyone else ever to vote for that was black. I don't see how people can get right up and say "Oh they're just voting for him because he's black".

[Roxie]

The funny thing about this is that Obama didn't even win the popular vote. Hilary did. And black people haven't had anyone else ever to vote for that was black. I don't see how people can get right up and say "Oh they're just voting for him because he's black".
Also, the idea of white people voting for a white person just b/c that person is white never seems to cross the minds of said people...and when it is brought up is considered ludicrous. Yet their charge is still valid in their minds.

What I really hated was during the primaries, I couldn't win. Either I was voting for Hilary, b/c we're both female or I was voting for Barack b/c we're both black. And voting for one mean the rejection of the other. ARRGH!

[Plekto]

The fact that Obama is of African heritage period is something special. Whether he's from America or not. Obama even stated that it may take a couple of terms before significant change happens, assuming it does. As for people seeing him as "black", I'll just say a quote from Collin Powell which is really pretty much straight-forward:

"Look if you walk down the street and look like I do with my skin tone, you're going to be viewed as black".

True. But he wasn't raised with the entire culture that 99%+ of black people in America have. No angst, no repression, no segregation... So he really doesn't have a emotional tie-in at the same level as if he was raised in a typical home in America with black relatives all around him. It's kind of like he's been adopted into the black family as opposed to being born into it. So there's a bit of a disconnect. Doubly so, since Hawaii is really about as non-racist towards black people as it gets. Quite a far cry from Oakland.

He really doesn't act or think the same as people who went through all of that do. Does he have black skin? Of course. Is he the same as most of black America? Well... not entirely. Hence my comment about their likely being surprised at how little he actually will do in those areas.

[mawande]

The funny thing about this is that Obama didn't even win the popular vote. Hilary did. And black people haven't had anyone else ever to vote for that was black. I don't see how people can get right up and say "Oh they're just voting for him because he's black".

Um... did you know that someone called Clinton the black president? And they weren't joking, though not referring to his ethnicity.

1972 Shirley Anita St. Hill Chisholm, United States of America
First African American woman to seek a major party’s nomination for President. She campaigned throughout the country and was on the ballot in twelve primaries in what was largely an educational campaign. She received 151.25 delegate votes at the Democratic National Convention. Member the first African American woman of the New York state legislature from 1964-68 and of the House of Representatives 1969-83. She lived (1924-2005).:us:

[bluestars87]

Um... did you know that someone called Clinton the black president? And they weren't joking, though not referring to his ethnicity.

1972 Shirley Anita St. Hill Chisholm, United States of America
First African American woman to seek a major party’s nomination for President. She campaigned throughout the country and was on the ballot in twelve primaries in what was largely an educational campaign. She received 151.25 delegate votes at the Democratic National Convention. Member the first African American woman of the New York state legislature from 1964-68 and of the House of Representatives 1969-83. She lived (1924-2005).:us:
When I said have black people ever had anyone else to vote for into president, I meant someone that actually stood a chance of actually making it.

[bluestars87]

True. But he wasn't raised with the entire culture that 99%+ of black people in America have. No angst, no repression, no segregation... So he really doesn't have a emotional tie-in at the same level as if he was raised in a typical home in America with black relatives all around him. It's kind of like he's been adopted into the black family as opposed to being born into it. So there's a bit of a disconnect. Doubly so, since Hawaii is really about as non-racist towards black people as it gets. Quite a far cry from Oakland.

He really doesn't act or think the same as people who went through all of that do. Does he have black skin? Of course. Is he the same as most of black America? Well... not entirely. Hence my comment about their likely being surprised at how little he actually will do in those areas.

I think you're missing the point. The fact that he's of African heritage period and that he's the president of the United States is worth celebrating if you're a person of African heritage here in America. Regardless if he was born here or not. The fact that the US population was ready for a drastic change like this and measure someone based on their character instead of their skin color is huge. That is what people fought for back during the Civil Rights era. Just for the "possibility" that something like this could happen in this country and it has. I mean what are you complaining about? Are you trying to say that the people that voted for Obama are misguided in some fashion? People are celebrating because mankind has taken a step forward. Not soley because the United States president is black.

[Firefly]

How about a Gigapan image of the Inauguration? O_O (http://gigapan.org/viewGigapanFullscreen.php?auth=033ef14483ee8994966 48c2b4b06233c)

[Fermented Yeast Paste]

Haha Justice Thomas looks like he's asleep. Can't say that I'm surprised.

[mawande]

When I said have black people ever had anyone else to vote for into president, I meant someone that actually stood a chance of actually making it.

Honey, I haven't checked to confirm your statement that Clinton won the popular vote, but I know that she was not popular with me. Now I can't be sure that my opinions weren't tainted by her husband's behavior. But, in the end, only two parties had a chance of gaining the presidency, and I just could not vote for McCain and Palin.

[mawande]

The funny thing about this is that Obama didn't even win the popular vote. Hilary did. ".

This website indicates otherwise, but the margin is narrow.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/democratic_vote_count.html

[daidokoro]

Clinton only wins the popular vote if you include Michigan, where Obama's name was not on the ballot.

Not that it matters anyway, the race was all about delegates anyway.

[Mastiker]

How about a Gigapan image of the Inauguration? O_O (http://gigapan.org/viewGigapanFullscreen.php?auth=033ef14483ee8994966 48c2b4b06233c)

Bush and Cheney look like Bond villains. O.O;;

[stsparky]

Bush and Cheney look like Bond villains. O.O;;
http://static.guim.co.uk/Guardian/lifeandstyle/gallery/2008/sep/26/fashion1/BlofeldYOLTKobalCollection-3368.jpg
Cheney needs an Angora cat then ...
http://static.guim.co.uk/Guardian/lifeandstyle/gallery/2008/sep/26/fashion1/ZorinVTAKAllstar2-3768.jpg
If Bush had style ...
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/5a/Blofelds.jpg
Shame the Bush executive branch bozos were simply evil and boring.

[Plekto]

I think you're missing the point. The fact that he's of African heritage period and that he's the president of the United States is worth celebrating if you're a person of African heritage here in America. Regardless if he was born here or not. The fact that the US population was ready for a drastic change like this and measure someone based on their character instead of their skin color is huge.


I completely agree.


That is what people fought for back during the Civil Rights era. Just for the "possibility" that something like this could happen in this country and it has.


But this is where it starts to get murky. To see all of the people going on about civil rights and their personal struggles and them looking at him like he's The Messiah - the one who finally made it...

He's not. The truth is that he's just another mixed heritage person like half of America now is. What really happened is that our society has finally washed its hands of the WASP inbred elites. Now that in itself, as you said, is huge. Expect part Hispanic and women and others to now be seen as viable choices by the two parties.


Are you trying to say that the people that voted for Obama are misguided in some fashion? People are celebrating because mankind has taken a step forward. Not solely because the United States president is black.

I think they ARE misguided and a lot of them DID vote for him because he was black. But his agenda, upbringing, and personality don't suggest much if any real ties to them. It's kind of as if most of the civil rights leaders and their generation are still stuck in 1965 fighting the fight for their rights and Obama is on a different wavelength entirely.

And I have heard many speeches in the last year or so about how he was "one of us" and how he would "change things" from the black community. I doubt if much actually does change for the poor of this country.

Though, as you said, there is a lot to still celebrate about. In four days, he's undone a good chunk of crap that that bastard Bush set in place. It also shows you how Bush was and apparently still is such a myopic bigoted idiot. Of course, the one real litmus test for Obama is whether he decides to use signing statements.

Here's a constructive idea - call or write your CongressCritter(tm) and ask that they promote a Constitutional Amendment outlawing signing statements. No, really. There is no good reason to allow this loophole, and I can't imagine Congress not voting for it. What's Obama going to do at that point? Say no? Force him to live up to this campaign promise if nothing else.

[Jetsetlemming]

http://i39.tinypic.com/fvvkwm.jpg

[Trump]

Leading up to the election and through the election process I heard many people who were voting, or were encouraging voting for Obama simply because of skin color. I never heard anyone say to vote against him due to skin color. Were there people who did? Probably. Were there blacks who voted for him based on his policies? Absolutely, and applaud them for taking the time to understand what is going on. But, based on everything I have personally experienced and things I have read, the number of people who did vote for him because of his skin color is just staggering. Maybe you like that sort of thing, which is why this event has a great taste for you, but after all I've seen and heard it tastes like heartburn to me.

To listen to many people in this thread, this event is just as important as the approval of the 15th or 19th amendment or the repeal of the jim crow laws. And I just look at those people and have to say ... "What?????" I just read an article where someone was comparing its signficance to the fall of the Berlin Wall and the end of communisim. WTF?? I mean, thse things, like the bombing of Pearl Harbor, were "Momentous" and changed the course of history for the entire world, the election of the first black president changed really nothing... nothing at all, and it is (or at least should be) simply a note in the history books.

I'll leave the actual politics to a different discussion.

[Roxie]

the election of the first black president changed really nothing... nothing at all, and it is (or at least should be) simply a note in the history books.

You are blind. It has changed a lot of things for a lot of people. It has changed ppl's ideas about what and who they can be ALL AROUND THE WORLD. On NPR, all last week, they did a special about what Obama's election the presidency meant for minorities in Europe. All across Europe. If you did just a fingernail's scratch worth of digging, you would see this changed alot. But b/c you can't see it, it must not have happened.

And I'm sure all the black people who researched the issues would be oh so happy with your patronizing applause.

I'll ask again, since you seem to have trouble realizing when I am replying to you and when I am not replying to you.
How can you say that electing our FIRST non-white president, when just a generation ago we were drinking out of separate water fountains, going to separate schools, not allowed to eat or shop in the same places BY LAW, isn't momentous?

edit: You know what, forget it. I don't think you could answer that question in anyway where I could even see your point.

[Firefly]

The whole "people just voted for him because he's black!!!11one" argument is starting to get really annoying. I'd say more people voted for Obama to keep Palin as far away from the white house as possible than anything to do with race.

[archdukezeb]

Leading up to the election and through the election process I heard many people who were voting, or were encouraging voting for Obama simply because of skin color. I never heard anyone say to vote against him due to skin color.

Really nobody voted against him because of his skin color and racial identity? Did you forget all the, he's secretly a Muslim, he's a terrorist, Obama is going to play rap music at the inauguration, to many other stupid things I heard everywhere but now have left my mind. Just because people weren't shouting "NIGGER, NIGGER, HE'S A NIGGER LET'S LYNCH 'EM" doesn't mean there weren't a slew of racist accusations made about him.

Either you have a very selective memory or you simply can't recognize the difference between being racist and not being racist.

[Jetsetlemming]

Obama getting elected didn't change anything racially, it proved things were changed, you semantic dickholes.





:P

[mawande]

Oh, oh don't forget THIS one!

http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/02-12-2008/106778-Amazing_Obama-0

key point: "Alan Keyes, a Presidential candidate has also filed a lawsuit in California Supreme Court to not certify the California Electors of the US Electoral College until Obama can prove that he is a US citizen."

[bluestars87]

But this is where it starts to get murky. To see all of the people going on about civil rights and their personal struggles and them looking at him like he's The Messiah - the one who finally made it...

He's not. The truth is that he's just another mixed heritage person like half of America now is. What really happened is that our society has finally washed its hands of the WASP inbred elites. Now that in itself, as you said, is huge. Expect part Hispanic and women and others to now be seen as viable choices by the two parties.

No I still don't think you get it. It's not about Barack Obama. It's about America and mankind and how far we've come in such a short way. A person with just a trace of African heritage while actually looking black (because Obama does look black and that has a major effect on how people view things like it or not) would not have been an ideal choice for president 40 years ago. People as a majority just wouldn't have been ready for it. I'd feel the same if our president was of Mexican heritage in terms of how happy I was at this accomplishment for our civilization.

I think they ARE misguided and a lot of them DID vote for him because he was black. But his agenda, upbringing, and personality don't suggest much if any real ties to them. It's kind of as if most of the civil rights leaders and their generation are still stuck in 1965 fighting the fight for their rights and Obama is on a different wavelength entirely.

And I have heard many speeches in the last year or so about how he was "one of us" and how he would "change things" from the black community. I doubt if much actually does change for the poor of this country.

Even if black people did vote for him because he's just black (which is dumb obviously) you can't really a blame an entire society that's basically been held back for 200 years even since the same society was forced to come to this country under unsettling circumstances. It's not surprising that blacks have the worst education rate here in America. But when people of African heritage come here through natural immigration they are more likely to succeed.

[bluestars87]

Leading up to the election and through the election process I heard many people who were voting, or were encouraging voting for Obama simply because of skin color. I never heard anyone say to vote against him due to skin color. Were there people who did? Probably. Were there blacks who voted for him based on his policies? Absolutely, and applaud them for taking the time to understand what is going on. But, based on everything I have personally experienced and things I have read, the number of people who did vote for him because of his skin color is just staggering. Maybe you like that sort of thing, which is why this event has a great taste for you, but after all I've seen and heard it tastes like heartburn to me.

To listen to many people in this thread, this event is just as important as the approval of the 15th or 19th amendment or the repeal of the jim crow laws. And I just look at those people and have to say ... "What?????" I just read an article where someone was comparing its signficance to the fall of the Berlin Wall and the end of communisim. WTF?? I mean, thse things, like the bombing of Pearl Harbor, were "Momentous" and changed the course of history for the entire world, the election of the first black president changed really nothing... nothing at all, and it is (or at least should be) simply a note in the history books.

I'll leave the actual politics to a different discussion.

So basically you're blaming blacks for acting a certain way since their heritage in this country (or lack there of) has been held back for two centuries? And you suddenly expect an uneducated society to change it's ways ever since the same rights that everyone else has had for 200 years has only been granted to them the past 40? Yeah that logic works perfectly. Perhaps none of this would have ever happened if inappropriate immigration wasn't forced before the United States was even constructed.

[Joe Rocket]

How about a Gigapan image of the Inauguration? O_O (http://gigapan.org/viewGigapanFullscreen.php?auth=033ef14483ee8994966 48c2b4b06233c)


Aww dammit! I'm too far out and to the right to see myself! :duh:

I didn't know there was so many soldiers and people on the rooftops, all I was
able to see was about a couple on every building down towards the Washington Monument.

[bluestars87]

This website indicates otherwise, but the margin is narrow.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/democratic_vote_count.html
Well CNN and several news stations stated it the other way around.

Besides, Iowa, Neveda, Washington, and Maine didn't even release their vote totals. Those four states were estimated with that site.

Not only that, but random US territories such as Puerto Rico and American Samoa can vote in the primaries, but not general election. So it's quite complicated. Which is why some democrats vowed to vote for McCain because they felt it was unfair that Hilary got more votes, but not the nomination. Honestly, Republican rules are way simpler.

[japanat]

It's about America... and how far we've come in such a short way. A person with just a trace of African heritage while actually looking black (because Obama does look black and that has a major effect on how people view things like it or not) would not have been an ideal choice for president 40 years ago. People as a majority just wouldn't have been ready for it. I'd feel the same if our president was of Mexican heritage in terms of how happy I was at this accomplishment for our civilization. I agree with you 100% here. People around me laughed when Jesse Jackson ran back in the '80s, because he didn't have a snowball's chance in hell of making it.

Even if black people did vote for him because he's just black (which is dumb obviously) you can't really a blame an entire society that's basically been held back for 200 years even since the same society was forced to come to this country under unsettling circumstances. It's not surprising that blacks have the worst education rate here in America.Why not? Maybe 50, even 30 years ago, that would have been a huge factor - lower incomes, leading to lower budgets for schools; cheaper equipment, the list goes on. But the desire to get an education? You've obviously studied hard and gotten the most out of your education. Why expect less of others?

[bluestars87]

Why not? Maybe 50, even 30 years ago, that would have been a huge factor - lower incomes, leading to lower budgets for schools; cheaper equipment, the list goes on. But the desire to get an education? You've obviously studied hard and gotten the most out of your education. Why expect less of others?
Because people are products of their environment. And that doesn't go away from an entire society in just 40 years when civil rights are finally granted to an entire society...one that was used to a certain way of living. That kind of thing passes on to children and so forth. It doesn't just disappear. People aren't educated in terms of how to raise their children and the cycle continues. They're taught that whites and so forth are always skeptical about black heritage due to what happened in the past...and like I said, the cycle continues. But that doesn't mean we aren't slowly getting better. This past election has proved that. And blacks are still discriminated against in terms of housing, schooling, and other aspects like jobs. It still goes on, it's just swept under the rug. Do you really think things would be the same now if blacks had immigrated here naturally 200 years ago? Or even if they were brought here in an unethical fashion, if they had the same rights that everyone else has had for two centuries, do you really believe that our society would be in such dire circumstances as it is today? It's not a coincidence that we as a people have the worst education rates in America and other elasticities that came here naturally don't.

As far as my education was concerned I was quite lucky. I wasn't raised in the worst environments. I actually lived in an area part of my life where there were mostly Asian and white people...as were my friends. Regardless, I'm the first one in my family really to go to any sort of extensive college program. And in terms of how to go about it the right way financially it took me a while because I honestly didn't know what I was doing. Why not? Because my family had no experience with college. Could I have gone and gotten some outside help? Sure, I did actually. Or rather my high school advisers came to me and stayed on my case. I was just another stereotypical black kid slacker in high school not too long ago. It's just these past two or three years I've started to really zero in on my priorities and responsibilities in life.

[Jetsetlemming]

Because people are products of their environment. And that doesn't go away from an entire society in just 40 years when civil rights are finally granted to an entire society...one that was used to a certain way of living. That kind of thing passes on to children and so forth. It doesn't just disappear. People aren't educated in terms of how to raise their children and the cycle continues. They're taught that whites and so forth are always skeptical about black heritage due to what happened in the past...and like I said, the cycle continues. But that doesn't mean we're slowly getting better. This past election has proved that. And blacks are still discriminated against in terms of housing, schooling, and other aspects like jobs. It still goes on, it's just swept under the rug. Do you really think things would be the same now if blacks had immigrated here naturally 200 years ago? Or even if they were brought here in an unethical fashion, if they had the same rights that everyone else has had for two centuries, do you really believe that our society would be in such dire circumstances as it is today? It's not a coincidence that we as a people have the worst education rates in America and other elasticities that came here naturally don't.
Environments are products of the people living in them. I grew up going to inner city schools, and I don't accept a single goddamn excuse for the students that go to them. The teachers try the best they can but fuckshit students who refuse to do schoolwork and try to get an education, seeing that as copping to "The Man", and violently repress anyone else who tries, ESPECIALLY black kids that try, accusing them of being "Oreos", is why inner city and black schools have such results.

[bluestars87]

Environments are products of the people living in them. I grew up going to inner city schools, and I don't accept a single goddamn excuse for the students that go to them. The teachers try the best they can but fuckshit students who refuse to do schoolwork and try to get an education, seeing that as copping to "The Man", and violently repress anyone else who tries, ESPECIALLY black kids that try, accusing them of being "Oreos", is why inner city and black schools have such results.
No personal offense, but that's stupid logic and doesn't make sense at all. That's like saying people of African heritage just decided as a culture to have their education rates suck for no reason at all long ago and carry on that knowledge if racism didn't exist. That's also saying that years of slavery and discrimination over the years and lack of rights that everyone else has been entitled to for the past 200 instead of 40 had no effect on the society of black America today. Environments are products of the people living in them because those same environments are first influenced by the type of people living there. Practices such as segregation, redlining, or racial steering has had major impacts on America with the black community until such practices were supposed to be coined illegal in 1964 (actually 1866)...of course people still did it for quite some time and still do today I'm sure via "closed doors". It's like you're saying racism hasn't had any effects on the black community in this country.

And of course it's not surprising that black culture identifies people of white heritage to show oppression. I like how Chris Rock put it: "black people think it's cool to be dumb". And that's essentially the truth. Why? Because like I said there is a large group of the black community that sees white people in a different light. Which is why being anything close to them (stereotypically), such as speaking grammatically correct and educated is seen as selling out. Blacks here in America literally have no culture to fall back on. Whatever happened to it was erased when people from Africa were brought here by force. Which is why there really aren't any holidays here in America for people of black heritage. And no Kwanzaa does not count. Most black people don't know where they came from in terms of which area in Africa from their ancestors. And that's most likely very difficult to trace considering the circumstances. But the main question is if black people weren't oppressed all of these years would the desire for self segregation from anyone that may be of white background exist?

[Jetsetlemming]

You are either illiterate or retarded.

[bluestars87]

You are either illiterate or retarded.
Yes not surprising you can't counter my argument with a civilized/detailed response and have chosen to take offense with me instead of my comment. Please don't talk to me anymore if you're going to continue this kind of behavior.

[Roxie]

Hai Guyz
There is a handy "ignore" tool in your user control panels.

[bluestars87]

Oh and Hilary Clinton basically had the black vote wrapped up until she screwed herself with the Reverend Wright scandal that broke out.

[Plekto]

No I still don't think you get it. It's not about Barack Obama. It's about America and mankind and how far we've come in such a short way. A person with just a trace of African heritage while actually looking black (because Obama does look black and that has a major effect on how people view things like it or not) would not have been an ideal choice for president 40 years ago. People as a majority just wouldn't have been ready for it. I'd feel the same if our president was of Mexican heritage in terms of how happy I was at this accomplishment for our civilization.


I already mentioned this. The larger issue is how the population has moved beyond the old ways and is embracing a new way of looking at ourselves. But I firmly believe that money and power trumps race and ethnicity. It has always been about rich and poor and the other issues are largely(but not entirely) smokescreens and diversions.

Obama aspires to be a typical yuppie lawyer and I really doubt if he will be a modern MLK. But to hear a lot of people go on about him, they sure seem to expect him to. Is it historic? Sure. I just think that Obama will not really take up the issues facing the black community at large. Maybe I'm a cynic here. But nothing so far has shown me that he's going to be that way. If anything, he's doing his best to embrace the current system.


Even if black people did vote for him because he's just black (which is dumb obviously) you can't really a blame an entire society that's basically been held back for 200 years even since the same society was forced to come to this country under unsettling circumstances.

Sure I can. Each person has the ability to chose as they wish. Without being tied to their past or family history or what happened long, long ago. Unfortunately, few people do. All too many don't vote or do things on their own but instead, because of crap that happened in the past. :frypan:

Now I actually do personally support Obama, but I think that there are going to be a lot of people who are let down as well in the black community.

[bluestars87]

I already mentioned this. The larger issue is how the population has moved beyond the old ways and is embracing a new way of looking at ourselves. But I firmly believe that money and power trumps race and ethnicity. It has always been about rich and poor and the other issues are largely(but not entirely) smokescreens and diversions.

Obama aspires to be a typical yuppie lawyer and I really doubt if he will be a modern MLK. But to hear a lot of people go on about him, they sure seem to expect him to. Is it historic? Sure. I just think that Obama will not really take up the issues facing the black community at large. Maybe I'm a cynic here. But nothing so far has shown me that he's going to be that way. If anything, he's doing his best to embrace the current system.

Well it's kind of hard to be super passionate and solve domestic issues like Civil Rights while also having international turmoil taking place overseas. He's the president, not a civil rights leader. If he tried to pay attention to both issues and solve them or rather, improve them drastically at the same time it probably wouldn't work. Just like it failed with Lyndon B. Johnson.



Sure I can. Each person has the ability to chose as they wish. Without being tied to their past or family history or what happened long, long ago. Unfortunately, few people do. All too many don't vote or do things on their own but instead, because of crap that happened in the past. :frypan:

Now I actually do personally support Obama, but I think that there are going to be a lot of people who are let down as well in the black community.
Will that would be illogical if you did. It's like blaming black people for the problems that plague their own culture today in America when really they are a victim of a cycle that has spanned over two centuries. The people that vote for Obama just because he has African heritage are probably the same individuals who see white people in a different light. Why? Because they were raised that way and so were their parents and so forth. Of course that wasn't an accident. But things have gotten better since Hilary was getting the majority of the black vote for a while. However I'm not sure if that was because she had connections will Bill and no one knew who Obama was.

[Karthak]

Oh and Hilary Clinton basically had the black vote wrapped up until she screwed herself with the Reverend Wright scandal that broke out.
I thought Wright was a problem for Obama?

[bluestars87]

I thought Wright was a problem for Obama?
He was. When those tapes kept playing over and over again with Wright saying things like "Not god bless America, god damn America" and "US of KKK-A" Hilary started making comments about Obama and his pastor when asked such as "Well he wouldn't have been my pastor" and some other shit. They called it the "Wrightmare" for Hilary and that's basically what is was as she started losing the black vote. That and Bill Clinton said some unfavorable stuff too.

[Jetsetlemming]

Yes not surprising you can't counter my argument with a civilized/detailed response and have chosen to take offense with me instead of my comment. Please don't talk to me anymore if you're going to continue this kind of behavior.
If you want a civilized response, you should actually read my post and respond to what I was actually saying instead of just babbling on about something that had nothing to do with my post and making excuses. You cannot blame disruptive students on racism.
You either cannot properly read, or are too stupid to comprehend what you do.

[Plekto]

Well that would be illogical if you did. It's like blaming black people for the problems that plague their own culture today in America when really they are a victim of a cycle that has spanned over two centuries.

But that sort of "victim" thinking is exactly what keeps them from moving beyond all of it. In the end, it is each person's responsibility to take charge of their life and change it or not. Nobody else is really to blame.

Now, sure, there are endemic problems that they do face, but the choice is always there - buy into it or move beyond it. I see too many people lately of all races and ethnicities who would rather complain and bitch about how it's messed up rather than taking personal responsibility for their children and their futures.

[Roxie]

:bang:

[bluestars87]

If you want a civilized response, you should actually read my post and respond to what I was actually saying instead of just babbling on about something that had nothing to do with my post and making excuses. You cannot blame disruptive students on racism.
You either cannot properly read, or are too stupid to comprehend what you do.
Wow more insults. Not surprising. Seems that that is really all you have left in your arsenal...which wasn't impressive to begin with. I already did respond to your post in full. What I said perfectly made sense. The fact that you're saying that past racism has no effect on a society just makes you ignorant. Just because you choose to ignore it doesn't make it not true. Here's a thought, how about you try disapproving my analysis then if you're so certain that racism hasn't effected today's society as far as the black community is concerned here in America.

Yes, black people just decided to act a fool from the beginning when they were forced here and pass the knowledge on generation to generation. Past oppression had nothing to do with anything at all!!!

[bluestars87]

But that sort of "victim" thinking is exactly what keeps them from moving beyond all of it. In the end, it is each person's responsibility to take charge of their life and change it or not. Nobody else is really to blame.

Now, sure, there are endemic problems that they do face, but the choice is always there - buy into it or move beyond it. I see too many people lately of all races and ethnicities who would rather complain and bitch about how it's messed up rather than taking personal responsibility for their children and their futures.
Can't you do both at the same time? And it really is easy to say such a thing if you aren't a "victim". I already said in a previous statement that as a people we've made progress. Just don't expect the damage that's been done to instantly go away in 40 years. That's absurd.

[Jetsetlemming]

What "caused" the culture doesn't matter, and pointing fingers changes NOTHING. That culture causes the disruptive learning environments that make inner city schools so shitty, and it needs to be fixed. Trying to make excuses or explain WHY things are the way they are does not make the situation any better. Your views on racial issues have no bearing on this, a class issue. You think shitty inner city schools packed with any other color are doing any better? Because they're not.

[Plekto]

Can't you do both at the same time? And it really is easy to say such a thing if you aren't a "victim".


Well you physically CAN, but it's really not possible to do both in actual practice. And I know this - I've been a victim of "the system" myself a couple of times in my life. I could have caved and gotten all pissy and whiny and been a burden on society and hated the world, or I could have risen above it and seen a better future for myself. I've honestly gone through more crap in my life so far than most people do in a lifetime. And yet I remain positive and look forward. Because it's the only option that leads to a future.

Look, you have one shot at this life. Either you try your ass off or you die as some obscure person who did nothing. Sure, I feel for the black community, but I also know first hand how life is what you make of it. I can empathize with them to a point. But beyond that, I cannot have pity for those who don't want it bad enough or refuse to try hard enough.


I already said in a previous statement that as a people we've made progress. Just don't expect the damage that's been done to instantly go away in 40 years. That's absurd.

Fair enough. But this large scale/systemic damage is really at a fundamental level something that you willingly decide to buy into or not. Just like deciding to be happy or not - in the end, it's a decision every person makes for themselves. Millions of people whine and complain and refuse to move beyond it. And millions of others decide to escape the self-defeating cycle.

Here in Los Angeles, the difference between a two bedroom apartment in Compton and Pasadena is... $200 a month. If you can't be bothered to get off your ass and make $200 more and move to where there isn't massive crime and inner city crap that honestly, as Jetsetlemming pointed out, would fuck you up no matter what race or ethnicity you were, then you're letting yourself be a victim. It's not racial, not really. It's socio-economic. And people who decide to live in areas that are cesspools are choosing to do so.

Oh - there currently are hundreds of vacancies in better neighborhoods with decent schools. I know - I just moved this last month. I could have chosen a crack den in a bad part of the city or where I am now - a crack den(heh - it's really not a nice building) in an upper class area of town. Good schools for my son and safe to walk around even at night. The price difference? $100 a month.

P.S. This is coming from a real liberal, btw(registered Green Party member, musician, and long hair and all). I might sound like a typical "screw the poor" conservative, but I really do care and feel about the problems affecting our society. But only to a point. People have to help themselves, after all.

[bluestars87]

What "caused" the culture doesn't matter, and pointing fingers changes NOTHING. That culture causes the disruptive learning environments that make inner city schools so shitty, and it needs to be fixed. Trying to make excuses or explain WHY things are the way they are does not make the situation any better. Your views on racial issues have no bearing on this, a class issue. You think shitty inner city schools packed with any other color are doing any better? Because they're not.
Yes it does, because then we have insight as to how to actually fix the problem...which is what we're doing today and why cases like Brown vs. Board of Education were so vital as a stepping stone to changing the culture upstaging the "scientific racism" that was paramount in the late 19th century and onward. And yes racial issues do have bearing on a class issue. Most of black America is in a certain class today because of what happened years and years ago! What the hell is wrong with you? Are you serious? Not saying so is basically an insult to black America and saying that everything that happened had zero effect on the present culture today. It's why most black people are in the class of poverty when compared to every other ethnicity here in this country whose economic structure is based on capitalism. It's like you're implying that black people here in America were just born a different way than everyone else. Does this mean that you should feel sorry for the black kids that act a fool in schools? No. Does it mean you should necessarily respect them for their behavior? No. But at the same time understand they are a product of a problem that that's been going on since before this country was actually officially a country that we're trying to fix today.

[bluestars87]

Well you physically CAN, but it's really not possible to do both in actual practice. And I know this - I've been a victim of "the system" myself a couple of times in my life. I could have caved and gotten all pissy and whiny and been a burden on society and hated the world, or I could have risen above it and seen a better future for myself. I've honestly gone through more crap in my life so far than most people do in a lifetime. And yet I remain positive and look forward. Because it's the only option that leads to a future.

Look, you have one shot at this life. Either you try your ass off or you die as some obscure person who did nothing. Sure, I feel for the black community, but I also know first hand how life is what you make of it. I can empathize with them to a point. But beyond that, I cannot have pity for those who don't want it bad enough or refuse to try hard enough.

I'm just saying that you can strive to be more than you want to be and look towards a brighter future, but at the same time be aware of the actual system that's in place and not just ignore it like it isn't a huge problem and have an "oh well" attitude about it. I'm trying my best to get by with the cards that were dealt, however at the same time I'm just not satisfied with how this country has progressed the last 200 years. I suppose that's just my problem then. Do I lose sleep at night about it? No, but it does register in my mind every so often.

Fair enough. But this large scale/systemic damage is really at a fundamental level something that you willingly decide to buy into or not. Just like deciding to be happy or not - in the end, it's a decision every person makes for themselves. Millions of people whine and complain and refuse to move beyond it. And millions of others decide to escape the self-defeating cycle.

Here in Los Angeles, the difference between a two bedroom apartment in Compton and Pasadena is... $200 a month. If you can't be bothered to get off your ass and make $200 more and move to where there isn't massive crime and inner city crap that honestly, as Jetsetlemming pointed out, would fuck you up no matter what race or ethnicity you were, then you're letting yourself be a victim. It's not racial, not really. It's socio-economic. And people who decide to live in areas that are cesspools are choosing to do so.

Oh - there currently are hundreds of vacancies in better neighborhoods with decent schools. I know - I just moved this last month. I could have chosen a crack den in a bad part of the city or where I am now - a crack den(heh - it's really not a nice building) in an upper class area of town. Good schools for my son and safe to walk around even at night. The price difference? $100 a month.

P.S. This is coming from a real liberal, btw(registered Green Party member, musician, and long hair and all). I might sound like a typical "screw the poor" conservative, but I really do care and feel about the problems affecting our society. But only to a point. People have to help themselves, after all.
True people do have to help themselves. However you can't always just blame people for not being able to help themselves when they really aren't raised how. Just keep in mind that although we've made progress...it really hasn't been that long and if you're a black man in America things like racial steering in terms of housing and jobs, redlining, etc. still goes on even today and doesn't make things easier. Which is why when you advocate things like "be a man and take care of things yourself" it has to be taken with a grain of salt, especially when such people don't necessarily know how and there are certain odds against you. And honestly if you're not an educated person in terms of how to live in this capitalistic society and make it big (like most black people here in America) then it's going to be a struggle. But like I said, we're getting better...in most areas. Hopefully that leads to more educated individuals and they can past their deeds on to their children.

[mawande]

Children! Take a page from President Obama's book and largely ignore the person insulting you, then you'll win.

[ruaidhri]

Sometimes it's better to listen rather than to talk. I understand where Plekto comes from because I've shared many of the same thoughts. But it is from bluestars87 that I have gained new insight. Because of his posts I now better understand the difficulty for many black americans to, as we old whites like to say, pull themselves up by the bootstraps.

You don't have to agree with other people's reasoning to understand why they think that way.

Bluestar87, I personally believe you will go far in this world. Keep focus and you will move forward.

[Jetsetlemming]

Yes it does, because then we have insight as to how to actually fix the problem...which is what we're doing today and why cases like Brown vs. Board of Education were so vital as a stepping stone to changing the culture upstaging the "scientific racism" that was paramount in the late 19th century and onward. And yes racial issues do have bearing on a class issue. Most of black America is in a certain class today because of what happened years and years ago! What the hell is wrong with you? Are you serious? Not saying so is basically an insult to black America and saying that everything that happened had zero effect on the present culture today. It's why most black people are in the class of poverty when compared to every other ethnicity here in this country whose economic structure is based on capitalism. It's like you're implying that black people here in America were just born a different way than everyone else. Does this mean that you should feel sorry for the black kids that act a fool in schools? No. Does it mean you should necessarily respect them for their behavior? No. But at the same time understand they are a product of a problem that that's been going on since before this country was actually officially a country that we're trying to fix today.
Ok, sure. Let's assume all problems with inner city schools are caused by racism, as all the negative elements of urban culture are now caused by racism. Now, how do you suggest we use this knowledge to fix it?

[ruaidhri]

Jetsetlemming, stop it! You are picking a fight. It's posts like yours that discourage other members from posting and encourage long standing members to flee OP9.

[Jetsetlemming]

What? Challenging someone to defend their undefined opinion logically is not chasing away members, and if bluestars would quit OP9 over being called on a dumb position, then who the fuck cares about his posting anyway. Whatever your point of view may be, blaming the issues of inner city schools on racism does not in any way fix the issues of inner city schools. It just points a finger without offering any real solution.

[japanat]

JSL,

If you want to continue the argument with BlueStars, take it to PM, will you? This thread was about Obama's Inauguration, etc, but has devolved into you two arguing at each other. At the beginning, the discussion was informative on both sides, but now you're just parroting your arguments.

[Jetsetlemming]

There's nothing left to discuss beyond the off topic discussion this thread has gone down the last few pages. FYP made a general Obama politics and policy thread but people are refusing to move on.

[Trump]

Apparently the only blacks in this country live in the inner cities? What about the millions who do not? Those who live in the south, in the country, in the suburbs?

[bluestars87]

Ok, sure. Let's assume all problems with inner city schools are caused by racism, as all the negative elements of urban culture are now caused by racism. Now, how do you suggest we use this knowledge to fix it?
Isn't it clear? We don't use racism to judge. Not judging by racism eliminates things like segregation in schools, redlining, racial steering, and so fourth. Which is what we've been trying to do since the middle of the 20th century, fix the problem because we know what caused it. It's just going to take more than 40 years to solve since the damage was done nearly 300 years ago. We've gotten better, but there is still a LONG way to go. The United States has the right political and economic system in place via capitalism and democracy, but they are making up for their social problems currently that was developed long ago.

[Jetsetlemming]

Aha. I see the problem- you're posting through a time warp back from the Jim Crow era. We'll continue this conversation once you're modern and up to date.

[bluestars87]

Aha. I see the problem- you're posting through a time warp back from the Jim Crow era. We'll continue this conversation once you're modern and up to date.
And you're using terrible jokes that aren't funny to try and make a point that literally doesn't make sense. I have a better idea. Let's not continue this conversation. At least until you start to comprehend logic.

[Roxie]

....aaanndd, I think we're done here.