Jeez...enough already. Ya basta, know w' m sayin'?

Cyberspace really isn't the most productive arena for a dialogue with strangers on an issue as simultaneously emotionally subjective and politically loaded as "race and ethnicity." It's just plain untrustworthy. All too often, it seems to simply echo the tired refrains of American broadcast mass-media, what with the cliched conventions of reportage and editing, and the same old paint-by-numbers templates tritely exploited by the general run of its "paid professional" political pundit class ( vide Tim Russert, re: Harry Belafonte...who's next in line for that question- Oprah??)

In fact, the grim tone, lack of humor, and the vast amount of anonymous cyberspatial finger-pointing in this discussion is giving me the suspicion that the squabbling is primarily between self-selected teams of white liberals vs. white reactionaries- neither of whom have much personal experience of friendly acquaintance with actual black people. Although this being cyberspace, it's also possible that the abundant third-hand commentary and superficial anecdotes are actually being contributed by black people posing as clueless white people...or even the result of a disinformation effort by other minority groups, like the Eskimos, or the Russians...

Whenever one enters into a conversation on the Internet, it's imperative to bear in mind that interacting with text comments on a computer screen presents an entirely different setting than interacting with a human being sitting across a table from you.

To those sincerely interested in furthering cross-cultural dialogues and improving inter-ethnic communication, I suggest that the place to do it is out where human beings dwell in real space-time- not abstracting away about hypothetical situations; indulging in shorthand stereotyping- whatever the agenda; proffering just-so stories; name-checking from lists of famous/infamous pop-media celebrities; or other similar cheap-shot conjurations.

And make it funny, okay? I'm not hearing enough funny. That's no way to make progress!

You could start by accusing some of your black friends and acquaintances of their involvement in "sleeper cells", for instance...tell them that you're "hip to their game", "the jig is up", etc. You can try that routine out on your Latino friends, too, maybe some time in the mid-afternoon...warn them that you've finally found out the real reason for that "siesta" business...

The link to the study re liberal vs. conservative attributes has this to say: "While liberals prize the ability to look at all sides of an issue...."

Obviously, this study concluded prior to primary season 2008.

At least Obama isn't a woman too.

I'm late to this thread tonight, because of having dinner with family, but had to reply to your thought, since I look at the world and say, "All these men in charge! Ai yai yaiii!" [FYI... I'm white, not hispanic, but like to use that expression.]

Anyway, I had been pondering how different it might be right now if we had a Democratic candidate who was both black and a woman, and could actually unite us around both race and gender.

You imagine what the GOP could be saying... and I imagine the tap-dance they would be doing not to appear bigoted. One of the conservative pundits (Scarborough, maybe?) already said that that they (i.e., the pundits) were afraid this election season of being attacked for whatever they say about either Obama or Clinton. [He didn't mention Mcain.] I would love to see his fear all wrapped up in a single candidate, rather than split between two.

And in the news there was already a mention of Rove asking the GOP to stop "Husseinging" Obama. Of course, he's also now campaigning by touting McCain's adopted daughter, rather than smearing her parentage.

My prediction? Rove is already figuring out how to use the Democratic party's diversity (race/gender) against us... and focusing on class. I.e., turning our one-time strength into a weakness. Let's just hope that we aren't already doing his dirty work for him.

"Nah. Go read Shelby Steele's latest book. It will save me a lot of words."

Shelby Steele? LOL. Go read Claude Steele. Ever since his brother destroyed his main body of work, Shelby has been trying to recoup and what you reference is his latest, and mostly suspect, attempt.

instapunk is right - on! Having grown up white in a predominently black part of town, my beliefs are not "teetering." And Instapunk could have added Michael Vick, and his clueless multitude of supporters (a la O.J.) to his list of "Niggers," but then, the list is potentially endless. I might add here that every article on this site is pathetically one-sided Liberal crap, written by people who never went hungry a day in their lives or worried about being mugged on a daily basis. Yet, based on their Academic education which instilled their false sense of guilt; they feel they're on the moral high-ground !

She knows what she is about and what it could cost her in dollars and popularity if she embraced someone like Wright. Obama should take a few lessons from her on white people.

Rule #1: Always make us feel good about ourselves. Never make us feel small, small-minded, or racist -- even if we are.

Steele said Obama had two problems. His potential black support, and the angrier or the more philosphically aware that they were, the worse for him. White people and using white liberal guilt to appeal to them; he must not make them feel that they are not good people. Make them feel like racists or that he does not also belong to them, and they will turn on him.

I read a recent article that claimed that educated upper class black folks are waaaay angrier than poor black folks. (For the record, I believe poverty could piss anyone off.) There are many reasons for this. Were you in the thread when I had the exchange with TRenee that made her so upset? The subject was affirmative action. I sort of knew I was pushing her buttons, but in truth I was curious about her reaction. There are not many middle and upper class black people who have not benefitted from affirmative action. However, they struggle with the perception of others that they do not deserve whatever position they attain with that help. Bound to make anyone angry.

It is Shelby's contention that many black people want their black candidates to be black. They stuggle with the identity crisis that comes from moving away from that historic identity. Educated black people are far more likely to have read Cone and W.E.B. Dubois -- to have been politicized. If Obama acts too white he loses their support.

Shelby's book A Bound Man takes a critical at Obama's book and examines it from the standpoint that Obama wrote it, that of a biracial man searching for his identity. He said that Obama struggle as a politician would parallel Obama's struggle for identity. Reject his biracialness (his white mother and grandmother, his whiteness) and he would offend whites. Embrace his blackness and he wins blacks. Conversely, reject his blackness (Jeremiah Wright, BLT, the community) and his will lose black votes, while probably gaining white votes. It is a damned if you do and damned if you don't position.

I do remember what you posted about Dubois and double-consciousness. That is part of what has allowed Obama to come so far. He uses that to navigate the choppy waters between those two shores of white and black.

Most black people probably know this. Many here at Salon have no doubt read Steele's book. I have no doubt Obama has read Steele's book. That is part of what I mean by trying to have it both ways. I do think Obama is sort of a phony. I think he is his own creation. I actually understand this but I also resent it. My own style is distinctly non-political. I want to be myself and only myself. I don't want to have to please people. So sometimes I get pissed off at Obama.

About Hillary: I am really glad she has found a hairstyle that works for her. I don't imagine it is really possible for her to be herself in an open and public way. She is too sensibly defended. In her own autobiography, she almost never uses the phrase: I feel. She is a completely cerebral creature. She is not creative. She is not terribly imaginative, but she is, I believe, amazingly competent. She is as prepared as she can be with the experience she legitimately possesses (the Senate) and the life experience she has worked so hard to make useful to herself and to others. She is a Methodist to her core. Works matter!

We do need to understand our candidates on a personal and not just a political level. Take GWB. So much of what has happened can be read in two events: His animosity towards his father and his religious conversion.

Well enough of this. KStone will accuse me of writing an essay.