Is Harry Reid Right? An Essay Exploring Whether or Not President Obama is Black

by Justin La Grange

A lot has been made of Barack Obama being the first black president of the United States. From rappers celebrating through song to Campbell Brown tingling in her notoriously wet panties to Keith Olbermann savoring the shirtless images of the president on his ceiling, folks all across the US have been rejoicing in this fact. But is it true?

While the birthers are wasting their time digging a shallow hole to nowhere, nobody has bothered to question what might be the biggest misconception in the American sphere of thought, evading even the most brilliant minds of Keith Olbermann and Geraldo Rivera: President Obama may not be black.

But don't take my word for it. The answer comes from Harry Reid, who claimed Obama was able to win the presidency because he is a "light-skinned African-American with no negro dialect". I'll take it a step further: President Obama cannot simply be appropriately labeled "black". That of course requires me to make assumptions on what it is to be "black".

I think all would agree that a suitable litmus test for being "black" would include association through "racial identity" and "cultural identity".

In terms of racial identity, it is already questionable whether a half-white ethnic composition composes a "black person". Isn't it convenient that certain elements will utilize the underdog or "victimized" race to suit a political convenience? Why can't President Obama be called a "white" president when he is as white, ethnically and even moreso culturally, as he is black? Why do the country's "African-Americans" feel as though they can take more associative ownership of President Obama, even though he's as much "Irish like me" as "black like they"? I'm here to say that the "one drop" let me be a minority rule is no longer legitimate. If for that, I'm a Arab and a Jew, using my flying carpet to mosy on down to Wall Street. As my title picture would imply, there's not much of a racial barrier separating Barack Obama from, say, Charlie Crist.

But the Obama racial puzzle digs even deeper. As we all know, Barack Obama's paternal ancestry hails from Kenya, a region of East Africa that straddles Somalia, Sudan, and the Middle East. In addition to heavy Muslim influence, the region shares substantial Arab genetic composition with the Middle East. Admittedly, that composition and influence is far more substantial on the coastal region of Kenya -- Barack Obama's father was from an inland region and is quite African to say the least (it is important to note that he was Muslim). However, he likely has more than a slight helping of Arabic material when compared to West Africa and deeper west into Sub-Saharan Africa (such genomic information is helpful in tracking the origins of disease and fighting disease, etc).

And in there lies the core of my point. President Obama, as part of the aforementioned ancestry of his father, cannot identify ethnically and racially with those of West Africa, the near-exclusive origin of African slaves brought to America during slavery. You might ask how that is different from all kinds ethnic groups all across West Africa. I would say it's analagous to Northern and Southern Europe and the two different subgroups of white-Anglo and exotic-white that tend to subscribe to varying racial identities in both Europe and the United States. At the end of the day, you can call a near-albino Swede and a Greek Cypriot "white people", but there is a substantial difference in genetic material and dare I even say race. Obama Sr.'s moderate sprinkling of Arab ancestry is quite substantial in differentiating himself from the West African blacks who form the core of American black genetic material.

In terms of cultural identity, let's not pretend that President Obama's complete identity was not born and fostered in Honolulu, where you can go for days on end without seeing a black person. And there were not exactly Miles Davis jazz/soul bars in Indonesia, where President Obama's was dragged by his mother for a period of time so she could engage in more multicultural relationships with Muslim men. He was also raised by his white grandparents in Honolulu, who from what I've seen were not exactly the purveyors of black culture to President Obama.

But don't take my word for it. Rod Blagojevich had to recently apologize for asserting that he was "blacker than Barack Obama". And while Barack Obama was busy hitting up high profile dinners for the liberal elite, this was not a problem. It was only until he made campaign trail stops at large inner cities or black organizations that he began hocking a fake Jesse Jackson-like black accent with some strings of "negro dialect" (as Harry Reid would put it).

However the most important part of American black cultural identity is certainly a communal identification with slavery, as the practice was instrumental in forming the past and present social, economic, and political context of black life in America. If necessary, nearly every part of American black life can be somehow tied back to it, and President Obama has zero associative identity with this history.

To turn the tables for a sec, why not ask the question, how white is President Obama? Racially, we can start at 50% and then ask whether someone who is 50% white or 50% black deserves to be called or have ownership of one label or the other? Furthermore, how much Caucasoid Arab origin genetic material can we add to that 50% which is unique from the majority West-African American black origin? Then adding in the fact that President Obama's cultural origins are nearly completely white, it can be argued that President Obama has a minimum simple majority white identity, and therefore cannot legitimately be called one or the other.

But at the end of the day, who cares. Probably half the people I regularly associate with have some kind of polar split racial or cultural identity of some sort, and in modern day America, it's no longer a big deal. However, elements of the radical-Black left and radical-white right either seek to exploit the President's racial identity or use it as a fear tactic, and I would respond to those people that President Obama is neither black nor white, but a nice melting pot of American, and it's easier to leave it at that. Let the issues be the issues.

To President Obama and the Republicans in Congress: Throw Pelosi/Reid and Leftism Overboard

by Justin La Grange

After President Obama's productive interlude with Republican members of Congress, I cannot help but believe the President found it refreshing to engage with rational intelligent congresspersons with policy heft and suave, unlike the irrational SP nutcases in his party such as Barbara Lee, Henry Waxman, and Nancy Pelosi, all of whom are dragging him down like an anvil in quicksand with their polarizing hard-left ideologies. Secretly, President Obama and the Republican Congress can build synergies if they align now rather than after what will be a backbreaking defeat in 2010 which will render Democrats in Congress politically useless.

As they say, if you can't beat them, join 'em. If your friends in Congress want to jump off a cliff, are you going to join them just because they're your slightly slow secular-progressive Starbucks latte drinking friends?

At this point, President Obama knows he has two options with 2010 looming: Option 1 -- Create synergies with Republican members of Congress in order to build a successful trans-government coalition that will catapault President Obama to electoral success in 2012 or, Option 2 -- remain with Democratic allies through 2010 who will go firebombing in defeat, stubbornly refuse to build a coalition with the ideologically conservative majority, and continue to be a man on fire until extinguished in 2012.

Politics above all is a game of survival. When Option 1 is your only game of self-preservation, you better darn well take it, botox lady be damned.

Politics is also a game of political calculus. There are two key words to describe the political calculus in this country: center-right. What do 1976-1980, 1993-1994, and 2009-2010 have in common? They were not center-right, were dominated primarily by left-wing elements, and firebombed magnificently.

President Clinton was determined not to firebomb, and as the Clinton machine is based purely on political opportunism and political calculus, he swerved to the right, implimenting center-right legislation from the spring of Newt Gingrich's Contract With America, and rewrote history by calling it his own. To no one with a brain's surprise, this trans-government center-right coalition was magnificently successful, propelling him to a second term in 1996 (in no small part thanks to the grouchy Bob Dole) and a record as one of history's better "operational" presidents (minus Juanita Broadderick, Monica Lewinsky, impeachment proceedings, Whitewater, Vince Foster, Paula Jones, Kathleen Willey, Gennifer Flowers, Marc Rich, disbarrment from the US Supreme Court, renting the Lincoln Bedroom, etc).

So you see, President Obama can adopt the Clinton model, and even be completely smarter about it and redirect a centrist course now. Actually, it is imperative. To complicate things for Mr. Obama, he faces a larger credibility and suspicion gap than Mr. Clinton did, largely because of the complex far-left mystery that was his past inner-dealings, from Reverend Wright to Indonesia to Michelle Obama to community organizing to Van Jones to healthcare, et. al. He has to make a more concerted effort to prove he's not a manchurian candidate for the radical Chicago hard-left, and he needs as much time to prove himself as possible. He has to somehow rectify his radical divorce from his campaign promises for centrist government and political unity.

First and foremost, Mr. Obama needs to understand that Republicans bearing the doghouse label "party of no" is what is propelling their popularity. One needs to look no further than Scott Brown. Scott Brown ran explicitly on being the candidate of "no": "no" to a massive fat bureaucratic regulatory overhaul of healthcare and "no" to a supermajority that allows Democratic Congresspersons to engage in economic busting taxation and spending binges unabated. And what do you know, he did what man was never thought able to accomplish ever again: take Teddy Kennedy's senate seat in a state that is historically to the left of mid 20th century China.

President Obama needs to realize -- and articulate -- that the best kind of government is a government that sits on the sidelines and lets innovators and entrepreneurs structure society and its market order, remaining a skeletal enterprise that overseas legal fairness and societal justice. MSNBC commentators have often complained that the Republicans have no ideas, while everyone besides MSNBC and Hugo Chavez are sitting aghast, thinking to themselves "a government with ideas is a dangerous government".

And no, the people can see right through initiating a "spending freeze" on top of a vast heap of already proposed spending -- just like the get revenue but wait 4 years for the cost accounting procedures of the healthcare bill, Obama's numbers on the "spending freeze" make Enron look good. The Obama Administration is presiding over the largest ever federal payroll of 2.15 million government workers with gigantic salaries, hefty benefits, huge retirement packages, and the inability to be fired -- and next to no results to speak of. Meanwhile the private sector's average salary is 40% less with 80% greater productivity, delivering innovation and productivity on the most incredible scale.

America is drowning in economic calamity and you have the payrolls of the fat useless lazy incompetent bureaucrats expanding at the expense of suffering businesses, corporations, and the taxpayer. If liberals want to complain about a corporation, try complaining about the federal government for a change, delivering next to nothing on a $3.4 trillion dollar budget, putting any ideas of efficiency and results to shame. In response to the idea that it is just okay for people and businesses who produce over $250,000 a year to be the ones getting a hike, I have a very simple law of American economics to present to you: these people are the ones with the intelligence, fortitude, wherewithal, and acumen to create or expand business and commerce in America. It's that simple. When you hammer this group, you directly hammer economic production and job growth.

President Obama -- people want to see these government workers take the same haircut that the American people have been taking in the private sector. Former Oakland Mayor Willie Brown recently admitted on Fox News that the redistribution of productive private sector wealth to line the coffers of unproductive federal and state employees was destroying the economy of both California and the United States, and people are starting to realize it. They see two things: economic collapse and massive spending/debt; they're beginning to steadfastly tie those together in their minds and punish those who foster a big spending big government agenda. The tide is shifting, and one can only hope to God it will shift permanently.

President Obama, I will leave you with three simple policy propositions that will assure you a win in 2012:

• Silently work to defeat Pelosi's majority in Congress, rendering her the new House Minority Leader, silently dispose of Harry Reid, and realign with Evan Bayh, Mary Landrieu, etc. In other words, remove obstructionist obstacles to centrist government and align with elements who are part and parcel of American political ideology. Remember, it's all about the political calculus.


• Drive business and jobs into America with the reduction of the corporate tax rate -- give global and American corporations incentive to either setup or keep shop in America. Maintain the capital gains tax at 15% and keep the top tax rate at 35% -- the American Productive class doesn't keep money under their pillow. Insist upon massive bureaucracy/federal employee reform which includes a massive reduction in federal compensation and packages -- get the center-left to the right onboard to pass it.


• Insist upon tort reform and market solutions to healthcare which include selling insurance across state lines and lifting regulations for mandatory size fits all packages. In every other unregulated industry -- from computers to food to car insurance -- consumers get to choose the size, color, and attributes of the products they buy in the marketplace. It's time to sell lots of disaster only packages and dispose of a system where everybody is exploiting their insurance for counseling, acupuncture treatments, and hypochondria related excessive doctor visits. You're sure enjoying that 52" Sony TV and that trip to Cabo, so how about paying for your own restless leg syndrome treatment, acupuncture, and marital counseling while you're at it. With this model of health insurance reform -- implimented in both the private sector and public plans -- costs will drop precipitously. Tort reform can potentially save $600 billion dollars over 10 years. Work in a voucher related model for lower income folks who absolutely can't afford insurance. But don't, don't, don't create a model that creates up to 75 more government bureaucracies that we don't need to enforce unneeded regulations and expanded welfare programs that would make Stalin cringe.

This policy is the center-right political calculus that equals an American majority. That's where we as an American populace are, and Scott Brown's brilliant unprecedented win in Massachusetts proves it.

But the big question that is causing the American people to sit on the edge of their seats, waiting to be answered is: Does President Obama subscribe to political pragmatism and self-preservation, or is he do-or-die entrenched in the community organizing secular-progressive left? Will my previous warnings of a nefarious agenda by President Obama be validated? Get out your popcorn people, cause I think we're getting to the juicy part.