biracialpartizn

Thanks to  thebarefootrose

01] Do you have the guts to answer these questions and re-post as The Controversial Survey?
I do now.
[02] Would you do meth if it was legalized?
I expect there would have been a stretch of years that I certainly would have-but definitely not at this point in life.
[03] Abortion: for or against it?
As a matter of personal belief: I am against it.
As a matter of law and rights: I would vote for it to be legal and available nationwide. I would vote against late term abortions with
safety concessions. Further, I will never vote for or against a candidate based on their abortion stance.
[04] Do you think the world would fail with a female president?
No electable president, male or female, can do this--we Americans tend to overstate our global importance.
[05] Do you believe in the death penalty?
Ethically, yes. I believe it is right and just for a duly convicted murderer to die as punishment for their crimes.
Legally, absolutely not. Our justice system lacks sufficient moral standing, equality of judgment, and social competence
to be trusted with such power.
[06] Do you wish marijuana would be legalized already?
Yes
[07] Are you for or against premarital sex?
I am supposed to be against it, but I seem to lack either the willingness, faith, or discipline to live it. Therefore, I will not preach it.
[08] Do you believe in God?
Yes, and worship this god as well
[09] Do you think same sex marriage should be legalized?
Yes, and I think history will judge our nation's hysterical stance on this issue something like the segregationist South of the 50's
[10] Do you think it's wrong that so many Hispanics are illegally moving to the USA?
Yes, but it wouldn't stop me from illegally entering the USA if I were Mexican. Violating a nations laws and sovereignty is wrong but not wrong enough to trump my need of somehow obtaining a better life for my family and I.
[11] A twelve year old girl has a baby, should she keep it?
No, but I would think no less of her if she did.
[12] Should the alcohol age be lowered to eighteen?
Yes,with a concurrent increase of punishment for alcohol related offenses... substantial increases.
[13] Should the war in Iraq be called off?
Not at this time, I don't think the US has learned its lesson yet.
[14] Assisted suicide is illegal: is this right or wrong?
It is wrong ethically, medically, socially, and (possibly) Constitutionally.
[15] Do you believe in spanking your children?
If spanking my children had any effect on their behavior I would do it. However, all children are different and effectively raising
them, in many cases, requires the fear of physical pain (within reason) as a proxy until thoughtful conscience takes over.
[16] Would you burn an American flag for a million dollars?
Yes. Earning huge profits for exercising my 1st Amendment right?!? What could be more American?!?!?
[17] Who do you think would make a better president? McCain or Obama?
Obama
[18] Are you afraid others will judge you from reading some of your answers?
No, if someone understands what I have written and thinks less of me, I do not care in the least.
However, I am afraid of my answers being unclear and that someone, instead of seeking clarity, will let a wrong view of
my beliefs settle permanently.

As I watch hurricance Gustav approach the coast of Louisiana and my childhood hometown of New Orleans, it looks bad. The storm is at least as strong as Katrina but will arrive on the west side of the city, causing much more damage.

I am glad the city's population seems to be out of harms way, but considering that number is one-half what it was three years ago, you'll pardon my not being terribly impressed.  

I've done a little reading to see what actual progress has been made since Katrina to save the city from another flood.
Sad to say, not much.
Promised Federal money has been withheld for many reasons.
State boards have balked at required pricetags for decent levee protections.
No coastline improvement has advanced beyond the planning stage.
Proposed laws for more stringent building codes have been watered down to impotence by special interest groups.
Construction projects on both the Industrial and 17th canal are incomplete, so temporary stopgaps (mostly sandbags) have been placed in hopes of surviving the hurricane.

I'm pretty sad about it.

"Did you have to be a prick about it?" was the way my fight with God began.
( It gets ugly from here... )

     1982 was a tough year for movie villains to really stand apart from each other. The quality and variety of great antagonists in '82 was, perhaps, the deepest ever in a single year. This was despite the recent elevation of Darth Vader as the new standard for bad guy excellence. Even still, that year was remarkable, here are just some of the great evildoers 1982 produced:
 
1. That alien in The Thing who made sweet old Wilford Brimley turn evil was demonically scary.
2. Khan in Star Trek 2, was an indisputable all time great. Furthermore, in my biased opinion, Khan was the finest orator of villain-rhetoric      EVER.
3. Often overlooked is Clubber Lang (Mr. T) of Rocky III. If you set aside the cheese, you'll see what a cruel bastard he truly was. Remember just before the fight, he kills Mickey (an 80+ yr. old man!) by hurling him into a metal pole. Minutes later we see him absolutely pounding every vital organ in Rocky's body to salsa! Later, he gives crass interviews demonstrating his indifference to the dead and broken bodies he has left in his wake. Yeah, Clubber Lang was seriously Death-Row hard.
4. Poltergeist, Anyone my age who says they weren't scared as hell by that movie is a liar.
5. Blade Runner, another great villain not appreciated in his time, Roy Batty (Rutger Hauer).
6. Yes, the movie was crap but  The Beastmaster had Maax, played to the hilt by Rip Torn. He's a heretical priest to a bloodthirsty deity named "Arrgghhh".  His church service involves selecting children at random for guards to forcibly retrieve whereupon he personally hurls said youngsters into a blazing fire-pit where they burn alive. Then repeats as necessary. I didn't make that up.


 

  

Apparently,  when all other conditions are equal, situations of natural disaster reveal a racial disparity.
A white populace will exhibit traits of camaraderie, teamwork, and perseverance.
Whereas, a black populace will exhibit traits of felonious crime, viciousness, and self-victimization.
This masterwork of social  behavior  is the latest puerile vomit emitted by Rush  Limbaugh on his show, the text of which can be found here

If you find yourself as disgusted by it as I am, it is to your great credit.
If you want to know how to pound the living shit out of this racist "analysis" (and send the lemming who repeated it home crying), read my cut here.




Ultimately though Limbaugh's invective is rote and predictable, no one should be surprised by it.
What does concern me though is this:
How readily will millions of Americans swallow this "analogy" without even the slightest pause? 
How easily will it settle into their minds, neatly fitting into those crannies of prejudice which exist, not as substantive matter, but as negative space--waiting to be filled?
If anyone would like to share experiences which involve this, or observations of other similar instances of the more passive and subtle form of bigotry that seems to be its face today, please do.

Some four days ago I was discussing the racial edge of this political season with two of my closest relatives. Naturally, the subject matter funneled its way to the "blackness" of Barack Obama viz. my own. As a matter of objective fact Obama and I have unusually similar  backgrounds; both of African-caucasian genetic mix, single white mothers, frequently moved through our childhoods, we both have an intellectually curious view of the world, we found some success with a talent of eloquence in speaking (obviously in VASTLY differing degrees) We are both unquestionably black, not white.
Given this, my family members could not grasp why the final statement was 1. true by default and 2. not a choice we could opt out of or choose "none of the above" (I suspect Obama tried this at one time, I know I did). Their question to me was essentially this:
"When and why did you choose your racial identity to the exclusion of the other?". This is a seemingly valid point and one I've heard before, after all I AM at best, a mere 50% African in addition to the fact that my upbringing was, by way of parenting, a "white" one--a view BTW which minimizes external influences for children in broken homes, but I digress--. However, even posing this question demonstrates an inability to see our society through the eyes of someone of color. lolo_wilderkind recently posted a view of her own related to this which I thought was a brilliant deconstruction of the issue from the opposite side of the question, if you haven't already read it, you should. So understand that the relatives to whom I refer are both white women, one is my mother, from upper middle class backgrounds with enough affluence to afford tuition for both to major universities. They are both extraordinarily intelligent and successful women whose minds are as free from racial prejudice as one could imagine. They are both well read, well traveled, genuinely curious people. They have both known me my entire life and love me unconditionally. I say this because it's important you know in this case no matter what came out of their mouths during the conversation it wasn't intentionally mean or thoughtless. I doubt I could have been so patient with someone for whom I didn't know this to be the case.

This is my answer.
Any black person will tell you that from a young age they knew of some "difference" about themselves from the rest of our America which one day they learn to call "race". For me, it manifested constantly in ways subtle or blatant, in television, at school, in sports, friends homes, and even billboards among other things. This difference was not uniform in spirit, sometimes it was positive, more often it was bad, and occasionally it was vicious. No matter which, it was nearly  ALWAYS present and carried this message to me:  "you" are different from "us" and "we" can all see the mark of "your" difference. The consequence is that a person who is visibly of color is made to answer the follow up question: identify yourself, what (racially speaking) are you? because you don't look white. The emotional force of such a question, in light of its societal pervasiveness demands SOME answer.
For a person of mixed race the anxiety is increased because we quickly learn that the deck is stacked against us and pretty much any answer screws us. For instance, the answer "white" is absurd, and frankly insulting to the questioner. Imagine this scenario as a comparison: you encounter someone with really cool ethereal glowing, mercury colored superhero eyes that have bolts of electricity going through them and so you ask "Wow! cool eyes, what kind of eyes are they?" and are glibly answered "gray". For me to answer "white" is just as dishonest to the spirit of the question because clearly, I'm not white.
Answering "mixed or mulatto" only gets me one additional step from the questioners target. The target is to see which accepted category of race I fall into (mulatto isn't one, at least not in the USA) which is why the immediate follow up to my answer is always "mixed with what?". This need to corral me into one of the more familiar categories is usually (though not always) so the questioner can make certain assumptions about me which are based upon other assumptions of our society-at-large of what my race's world-view tends to be. The really funny part is this is done so the questioner can avoid potentially offensive behavior or words.
So, the answer becomes by default "black". No choice.

Those were my points on that day. The lesson for me was that they don't understand  my view because they can't understand it and never will. Further my expectation of them to do so is wrong. No one asked to be born into their skin color so how can fault ever be assigned based upon it? However, their lack of understanding didn't prevent them from empathizing with what I have clearly struggled with for years. My role then, when empathy is offered in lieu of understanding, is to accept it as the very best which can be given. Unfortunately our society isn't so fair minded and after 31 years of life it has actually created an unassailable wall between my mother and I which, no matter how hard we may try, will prevent us from EVER understanding one another on this matter.
      Since true understanding cannot be had I thank God it isn't a necessary condition for empathy which, for now in our world, may be the best we can all expect.lolo_wilderkind

-140 yrs ago the Emancipation Proclamation was effected.
-80 yrs ago the first black member of congress--Oscar DePriest--was elected (post reconstruction)
-42 yrs ago Ed Brooke was the first black man elected to the US Senate (again, post reconstruction)
-41 yrs ago, Thurgood Marshall was appointed and confirmed to his seat on the Supreme Court. The first black to do so.
Since then, the progress of black Americans in achieving these and higher influential positions has been frustrated (Colin Powell's efforts notwithstanding).

"This is the Lord's doing, and it is marvelous in our eyes"
Queen Elizabeth I purportedly said this upon learning she was the next monarch of England. Recognizing the all-but-impossible sequence of events needed to bring this about, she rightly recognized the hand of the divine in its manifestation (the quote is biblical, Psalm 118).

One and a half yrs ago, Barack Obama and a few core believers conceived an end which would require a nearly impossible sequence of events to occur for that end to come to fruition. Tonight it did.

"This is the Lord's doing, and it is marvelous in our eyes"