<p>
Things are very different in Africa. (I spent much of my childhood in East Africa.) In this country, I really believe that if your skin is brown, you are treated as black, it makes no difference how you think of yourself.</p>
<p>“mini: I don’t get the last part of your sentence.”</p>
<p>I know you don’t. That’s at least part of the problem.</p>
<p>“Things are very different in Africa. (I spent much of my childhood in East Africa.) In this country, I really believe that if your skin is brown, you are treated as black, it makes no difference how you think of yourself.”</p>
<p>Absolutely true. My Caucasian daughter, born in India, is ALWAYS treated as Black. My Mongol-Semitic daughter, far further from ever qualifying as the Queen of England, is always treated as white. </p>
<p>In Kenya, Joy is always treated as “white” despite very dark skin, and having grown up “Black”.</p>
<p>OK Hondu, I will humor your. The 35 years comes of public service in making change.</p>
<p>You can read all about it here:</p>
<p>[HillaryClinton.com</a> - About Hillary](<a href=“http://www.hillaryclinton.com/about/]HillaryClinton.com”>About - The Office of Hillary Rodham Clinton)</p>
<p>Janieblue</p>
<p>It is not that simple.</p>
<p>In the USA, classification for blacks is made by the establishment and not the individual. It goes back to Jim Crow or even further. I remember reading about a multi-racial (white/black parents) woman who fills out a form (don’t remember what type) and checked “Other”. Then found out later that it was changed to African-American by the agency/company rep. without her authority.</p>
<p>OK Hondu, I will humor your. The 35 years comes of public service in making change."</p>
<p>So, answer the question: was she part of the Big Lie of 1998 that later resulted in the invasion of Iraq, or not? Was that why she could vote for the invasion without reading the intelligence? Was she party to the murder of the half a million children killed by her husband, or not? Did she support her husband’s reform of drug laws which resulted in penalties for crack offenses being up to quadruple those for cocaine, and the disenfranchisement of 14% of Black males? Did she favor her husband’s approach to NAFTA, WTO, and the World Bank, shipping thousands of middle and working class jobs abroad, and creating the massive global pollution we have today, or didn’t she? </p>
<p>Why is it that, when I ask about the actual content of her so-called “experience”, I get virtually nothing back?</p>
<p>this is just something im curious of but did hilary turn the tide just because she started to fake cry on national television? i kno she has experience and all that and i personally think she’d be a strong leader but seems like everyone fell for the emotion thing. it seemed like the media blew the crying thing out of proportion and obama seemed to hav the upper hand b4 the crying scene.</p>
<p>Once blacks support one another, it’s always so noticed and criticized, but when white’s support one another it’s never viewed with suspicion. I wonder why?</p>
<p>I applaud Oprah for supporting Obama. He will not be the next president because we all know the U.S. is too racist for it, period.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Hondu: I never said it was, and I believe you. I simply quoted what Obama’s half sister said-- how she answered that question when asked how <em>she</em> viewed her brother (in terms of race). I thought her answer was telling. She is half Asian and half white, and views herself as such. According to her, he doesn’t view himself as “hybrid,” the term she used to characterize herself. </p>
<p>simba: I’m guessing mini means you should criticize or praise a candidate based on the issues, not based on the color of his or skin, nor on gender. He’s being critical of you because you refer to Obama as a “black candidate,” rather than simply “a candidate.” Qualifing him in that way also suggests a form of racism. He’s just a person, and you either think he’s suited to be President or not, based either on experience, or you believe in his stance on the issues, or whatever. The fact that he’s a man of color should have no bearing on that (just as Hillary’s gender should have no bearing on her candidacy). The fact that both race and gender seem to be central to their campaigns suggests that Americans still can’t look at someone simply as a candidate; consequently, neither one can win this election-- sad to say.</p>
<p>Feel free to correct me if I’m wrong, mini. ;)</p>
<p>babar, I agree with you, and with whomever (janie?) said that we dems never learn. So true. It’s So About The Machine. She (HC) is such a Party Girl, not as in, fun. The media loves ‘apparent’ winners. God forbid they should have an ounce of adventure or originality. God forbid they should let voters think for themselves, vote by themselves. Worse yet: God forbid that the public dish up surprises that the media can’t handle. Never met a headline grabbing journalist that was not also a control freak, major.</p>
<p>Media Agenda Defined:<br>
Step One:
Tell the public what you think they will do.<br>
Step Two:<br>
Tell them (subtly, through editorializing even indirectly) that they <em>should</em> do it.
Step Three:<br>
Congratulate yourselves ad nauseum the moment your self-fulfilling prophecy materializes.</p>
<p>This is why I never became a journalist. I didn’t want to run with such a crowd. The brave individuals in the business seemed too rare & invisible for my taste. Truly, I’ve read/heard very perceptive, open types, but their voices seem forever silenced by The Big Boys and Girls.</p>
<p>“The fact that he’s a man of color should have no bearing on that”</p>
<p>I don’t understand why that should be. It makes a difference to me when someone has the potential to break a glass ceiling. I’d never vote for someone solely because of that issue, but it is absolutely a factor. You can be a person AND a black man/woman/gay person/whatever.</p>
<p>“The fact that both race and gender seem to be central to their campaigns suggests that Americans still can’t look at someone simply as a candidate; consequently, neither one can win this election-- sad to say.”</p>
<p>How can it be, then, that they made it to the Senate? That body used to be as reliably white and male as the presidency is today, and race and gender were on the table in those campaigns just as they are now. Are the people of Illinois and NY (and the other states that have elected women or minority senators) “able to look at someone simply as a candidate” when the rest of America can’t?</p>
<p>“Why is it that, when I ask about the actual content of her so-called “experience”, I get virtually nothing back?”</p>
<p>May be perhaps you don’t live on this planet.</p>
<p>“mini: I don’t get the last part of your sentence.”</p>
<p>I know you don’t. That’s at least part of the problem."</p>
<p>so educate me.</p>
<p>janie: Thanks, I didn’t think it that way.</p>
<p>America votes by secret ballot; this is significant, as Americans’ unspoken prejudices are reflected in the ballot box. It doesn’t matter what you think should or should not be said in a public campaign.</p>
<p>FWIW, this life-long Republican would vote for Obama but not Hillary, over any current Republican candidate; the former perceived as a brilliant inspiration and example of the “American dream,” (with credentials), while the latter is perceived as an carpet bagging insider who is out of touch with today’s families. Unfortunately, its the current economy that will give Hillary the edge.</p>
<p>Obviously I’m having word trouble today. (Nauseam, not nauseum)</p>
<p>Enjoying the dialogue anyway.:)</p>
<p>I do think that if Obama is elected it would send a significant message to much of the third world that the United States is more diverse and accepting than we are often given credit for being. It’s not my most important consideration, but it is one of them.</p>
<p>Did anyone watch the CNN debate tonight? Hillary kicked Obama’s backside.</p>
<p>I think the bigger news coming out of this debate is the bickering between Hillary and Barack. Ugly affair; may turn off a lot of voters. Edwards came out the winner here, only because he stayed above the fray.</p>
<p>Hanna: My point is that here we are-- in 21st Century America-- still talking about race and gender in this election. Certainly, our own gender, race, and background impacts how we see and interact in the world. But wouldn’t it be something if Americans were at a place where the real issues were discussed, and the media covered the candidates on those issues, and where women and/or anyone of color could be running for president, and nobody thought twice about it? The fact that we continue to talk about Hillary’s gender and Obama’s race reflects just how far we <em>haven’t</em> come. Whether either one of them wins the nomination or the election, the next time a woman or a person of color (or even a gay person?) runs for president, this won’t be such an issue. Well, you know-- one can only hope.</p>
<p>As far as the Senate goes, women have been in the Senate, on and off, since the 1930’s, and from various states, including from the South, North, Midwest. I’m not sure what the difference is, but that’s a good question.</p>
<p>bulletpima: Yes, I actually think Edwards has been the best in all of these debates, but he really did shine tonight. He’s always been clear on the issues and very focused. He still gets my vote. I agree that the bickering between Hillary and Obama was embarrassing and ugly.</p>
<p>Obama’s just getting fired up. He’s not even started!</p>