Friday, April 4, 2008


And that was the title of the article that was emailed to me.

Yes, apparently she was not just racist, she was militantly racist just to put a little more flavor on it and to incite a little bit more panic and more reaction.
That thought rendering title was directly preceded by this personal add on
"DO NOT BE NAIVE TO THE FORCES AT WORK HERE........................

I'll stick with McCain. Do you realize that if Obama is elected our next
President she would be our new fist lady?"

Also special wording and not over-dramatic to drum up fear and panic! So I read what followed with open eyes and a bit of humor. That humor quickly turned to disgust and anger. That anger was not blind, because it's obvious what is going on here. Can't bring Barack down, let's go in the back way and tumble his wife. Next the kids are going to be on the chopping block for their refusal to buy and play with white barbies!!!! Their militant racism REVEALED for the public to see!!

(If my sarcasm confuses you then refer to the link to Aaron Roy's blog @ and refer to the Racially Exhausted blog for more insight into my current feelings. His sentiments mirror my own.)

Here is the first two paragraphs of the article:

In her senior thesis at Princeton, Michele Obama, the wife of Barack Obama stated that America was a nation founded on "crime and hatred". Moreover, she stated that whites in America were "ineradicably racist". The 1985 thesis, titled
"Princeton-Educated Blacks and the Black Community" was written under her maiden
name, Michelle LaVaughn Robinson.

Michelle Obama stated in her thesis that to "Whites at Princeton , it often seems as
if, to them, she will always be Black first..." However, it was reported by a fellow
black classmate, "If those "Whites at Princeton " really saw Michelle as one who
always would "be Black first," it seems that she gave them that impression".

So? IS she wrong in any fashion here? How was America founded? I thought it was obvious now that we stole this land from the current inhabitants and then proceeded to kill them off once we realized they were not suitable for enslavement (they kept running away because they knew the land and where to go, they were too susceptible to our European diseases). Yes, murder and stealing are crimes. We also sure seemed to hate the Native Americans or why would we want to kill them and steal their stuff once they proved of no good to us?

I also thought that it was common knowledge that once someone is black they cannot reverse that (google: Michael jackson skin whitening attempts). So she will always be Black, yes and its ok to be proud of your heritage. I am sometimes known to sport Proud to Irish shirts or pins, usually forced upon me by my grandma on St. Patrick's day (see previous post entitles Sarah Mary Catherine Murphy Celebrates St. Patrick's Day with a Blogpost) and never does someone feel offended or the need to call me racist, excuse me MILITANTLY racist as a result of celebrating my heritage.

Then next few paragraphs continue:

Most alarming is Michele Obama's use of the terms "separationist" and
"integrationist" when describing the views of black people.

Mrs. Obama clearly identifies herself with a "separationist" view of race.
"By actually working with the Black lower class or within their communities as a
result of their ideologies, a separationist may better understand the desperation of
their situation and feel more hopeless about a resolution as opposed to an
integrationist who is ignorant to their plight."
Obama writes that the path she chose by attending Princeton would likely lead to her "further integration and/or assimilation into a white cultural and social structure that will only allow me to remain on the periphery of society; never becoming a full participant."

Ok so some not so obvious information- Here Michelle seems to be referring to past Black historical figures and their timeless debate of how the Black community might best succeed and rise to equality. These figures are Booker T. Washington (segregationist) and W.E.B. DuBois (integrationist). These two men surfaced publicly after the end of slavery around the latter Reconstruction years and addressed the question of what Blacks are supposed to do now that are they are "free." Should they establish a society alongside that of the white but separate (separationist mentality) so they could run it and not have a constant lower class presence? While being separate they could run their own institutions and banks and seemingly own their destiny? Or should they integrate (integrationist) with in the white community, hoping that the new laws would all of a sudden change the white mentality and they as blacks would be seen as truly equal and allowed to fully particpate in society? This is just a simple taste of those points of view, as many issues arise with both points of views. But clearly, Michelle Obama is continuing this discussion that began in a relevant part of our history. ao why was this person alarmed then at her use of obvious historically relevant linguistics; separationist and integrationist? I can def. provide a biting commentary into the reasons (serious ignorance) and personal characteristics (white) of the supposed author of the piece, (not the people who emailed it on) but that will not further knowledge or love to attack others.

Also, I thought it was pretty obvious that people still enjoy being around others like them. They stick to their groups, you like hunting I like hunting lets hang out and shoot stuff. You like Jesus, I like Jesus lets hang out and pray and read the bible. This extends to ethnic groups. In Chicago, this is super obvious as the neighborhoods used to be drawn around ethnicities like Greektown, Ukranian Village, Chinatown, Pilsen (hispanic). IN some neighborhoods, this is still obvious like Humboldt park, but in others people ended up there as a result of redlining districts. Blacks were not allowed to move wherever they wanted. They were contained first on the South sides and secondly on the West side (garfield park/austin area)as they migrated to Chicago during the first half of the 1900's. Still large populations exist in those areas and Blacks can align together as all other ethnic groups do frequently. There are Irish supper clubs and Chinese restaurants that publicize a favor for hiring Chinese workers and Jewish social clubs to further Jewish children and families and none of this is seen as a problem. What if I was super Irish and I said I am white and a woman and a college student but always because of how my ancestor's struggled to leave a turbulent, violent and destitute country, always I am Irish first. People would not care. Really. But when Blacks band together they are feared and hated. The Jewish community is infamous for their interests in helping further their own community. No one has a problem with that publicly. But here, Michelle Obama is commenting on her Blackness and the fact that she identifies with it and this is seen as a detriment? A racist sentiment?


Michele Obama clearly has a chip on her shoulder.

Not only does she see separate black and white societies in America , but she
elevates black over white in her world

or maybe she sees what is going on here in America. For the most part, white and blacks have a little bit o' trouble getting together. Elevates black over whites? I did not see this, but even if she did personally feel that she liked blacks more because she is proud of who she is and wants to help others like her, WHITES HAVE BEEN DOING THAT FOREVER. They concentrate their wealth with other whites and build up and do not seek, sometimes, to go outside their community to bring in others in large numbers. It is just a fact. Seriously. Take a gander around America!

The following passage appears to be a call to arms for affirmative action policies
that could be the hallmark of an Obama administration.
"Predominately white universities like Princeton are socially and academically
designed to cater to the needs of the white students comprising the bulk of their

No! No way! Higher instutions in America actually CATER to whites? Shut the front door!
wow. i think they were serious.
I am sure Michelle Obama is smart, but it does not take a Princeton graduate or a liberal to figure that out. Look at the government and its racial make up. Or even better, look up the (racial) quotas instituted by Princeton and Harvard in the early 1900's. They blatantly publicize that far more minorities (at this time, Jewish) are accessing the college than they had planned. The lilly white makeup was being tainted with a little color. So they instituted quotas. (later repealed in the 60's, I believe)

Are you still reading this?
Here's the ending:

Michelle Obama's poll of black alumni concludes that other black students at Princeton do not share her obsession with blackness. But rather than celebrate, she is horrified that black alumni identify with our common American culture more than they value the color of their skin. "I hoped that these findings would help me conclude that despite the high degree of identification with whites as a result ofthe educational and occupational path that black Princeton alumni follow, the alumni would still maintain a certain level of identification with the black community.However, these findings do not support this possibility."

Is it no wonder that most black alumni ignored her racist questionnaire? Only 89
students responded out of 400 who were asked for input.

Michelle Obama does not look into a crowd of Obama supporters and see Americans. She
sees black people and white people eternally conflicted with one another.

The thesis provides a trove of Mrs. Obama's thoughts and world view seen through a
race-based prism.
This is a very divisive view for a potential first lady that would do untold damage
to race relations in this country in a Barack Obama administration.

her obcession with blackness. Obcession. Her desiring to help the black community is an obcession? I apparently have an obcession with helping the poor. An obcession. I want to say like five more times, obcession obcession obcession my mom wears obcession perfume. But c'mon, seriously? Her obcession with the black community. How do you obcess about a community? panic fear obcession panic fear. (I am laughing out loud at myself now.)

Michelle Obama's conclusive findings in her school paper say that she discovered at this upper echelon school that blacks do not identify with the larger black community. Well, butter my nose and call me sally REALLY? that is the summation point we are focusing on? White people that go to Princeton do not identify with the average white community either. No one identifies with Princeton, they are geniuses!! :) kidding. But an honest problem in black communities is that absence of the "talented tenth" leaving (W.E.B. DuBois reference). Once out in the world and succeeding they do not always return home and work to alleviate some of the social problems in their neighborhoods or communities. Well, Blacks are not the only people that are guilty of that. Who wants to go back home after you been out in the world? See ya mom, i am out. You know?

so the author sums up this neat literary work with this assertion, Michelle Obama would do tons of harm to race relations in America. BAsically, because she identifies with her blackness. But how do we know that? Because she wrote a paper on it in school?

Ok I try to get good grades, I do but I am not excellent at focusing and the world gets in the way alot. A time or two I have written a bunch of rambling garbage to fill up one or two of the ten page paper that is due tomorrow when its like 2 am the night before. How awesome would that be if like ten years later, when I am married and with children and completely oblivious to what a scribbled down, someone find my paper and then puts it out on the internet?

Draw your own conclusions.

*****I got this from two different people and then heard people at school talking about this and realized people are receiving this email and reading it and then talking about it.*****

Thursday, April 3, 2008

Rev. Wright or Wrong?

I think I am clever with that title, I really do.

I cannot seem to not care about this, or not respond to the recent Obamarific happenings as much as I want to. On the airplane both ways, politics and Jesus came up leading us straight to Obama. AND it wasn't that they saw the back of my sweatshirt (Barack My World) which led to conversation, it just was random talk. Family members and friends emailed and called inquiring about my response or to be like, "SEE? I am staying with good ol' McCain."

SO after much thought and not really a strong desire but a felt need to speak out I say the following.

I do not actually think Rev. Wright has much to be sorry for. I did not hear that whole sermon, as did any of us not present that day but the excerpt I heard that seems to be the most inflammatory, the one phrase that everyone is so freaking pissy about is "God Damn America. God Damn America for it's past treatment of minorities."
And I say yes, Rev. Wright, GOd Damn America and I think HE will. I see America as the most sinful, corrupted, materialistic nation going. But my views are not important here, the simple fact is that God will damn America unless they repent for their sins. The sins of blatantly denying the poor and the least, for obcessive materialistic views that are signifying idolatry and placing other things before the Lord. We are the richest nation (debatable lately with the crashing of the market)in the world, as we have been referred to for years. The Lord clearly says in the book of Matthew:
23Then Jesus said to his disciples, "I tell you the truth, it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. 24Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God."

later in that same chapter he confirms:30But many who are first will be last, and many who are last will be first.

Based on this and many, countless other passages about loving and caring for the poor and the least and welcoming the stranger, I feel America has the blood of the poor and the least all over her hands. Slavery, our treatment of immigrants, our denial and rejection of the poor in all arenas of life, our capitalistic striving to make more money and covet more things and our collaborative denial of Christ as our only savior from this life leads me to see God seriously damning America. SO go on ahead, Rev. Wright because I ain't mad at you.

Obama. He apparently ain't mad at you either! First just hearing Obama's speech and not knowing exactly what Rev. Wright said, I was struck deeply by something in his speech. Not all his elaboration on America's deep need to speak about racial issues, although I agree and felt relief someone with a bigger voice than I put it out there for us all to see. I was joyful at that but something else seemed to far outshine that for me. In his speech, Obama decried Rev. Wright's statements but he stood by the man. He stood by him despite those falling percentage points and loss of the super delegates (quick sidenote- HOW, i repeat with emphasis, HOW exactly do superdelegates fit into out idea of democracy? Do they have super powers that their votes are counted as more important and more super and special that other delegates of even common voters?) Obama did not reject or deny Rev. Wright. He said oh yes he did something wrong, but he is my guy, my pastor, my friend and I will not abandon him for my personal gain. How many of us could be that loyal, that forgiving, and that loving in the face of such adversity? Whether or not what the Rev. says was wrong or right, Obama was like no, no, hold up! Thats my friend and y'all better just back it on up. I respect that. I RESPECT THAT too hard. I was seriously blown away by that ability to stand up for what he believes and who he believes in. Yes, It was a great speech and monumental for many reasons. But this reason made me respect him even more and wear my sweatshirt a little more proudly as on this day Barack did Rock MY World.

Come back tomorrow for some Michelle Obama talk.