Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

design219 · Jan 20, 2009, 08:33 AM

Give us a report. Looks like fun... and cold.

SpaceMonkey · Jan 20, 2009, 09:34 AM

I'm thinking about it. I'll probably head to the Mall shortly. I don't expect it to be fun.

Atheist · Jan 20, 2009, 09:38 AM

I'm in town on business but staying in Northern Virginia. I thought about it but getting into the District would be almost impossible. It would have been nice to experience but I guess I'll just watch it on TV.

I used to live on Capitol Hill but that was when Bush was inaugurated. For some reason I wasn't as motivated to go and watch it in person. I probably should have since it still would have been a cool experience.

Eug · Jan 20, 2009, 10:01 AM

Quite frankly I'm a little surprised at all the hooplah. He's just another politician after all.

It seems like it would be rather painful listening to a politician blab on and on, while standing out in the bitter cold. And I say that as someone who might have voted for the guy, if I were American.

nonhuman · Jan 20, 2009, 10:06 AM

Originally Posted by Eug

Quite frankly I'm a little surprised at all the hooplah. He's just another politician after all.

It seems like it would be rather painful listening to a politician blab on and on, while standing out in the bitter cold. And I say that as someone who might have voted for the guy, if I were American.

Yeah, I feel like all the ritual and ceremony we invest in our government is part of the problem. We're treating our politicians like the aristocracy and monarchy of Britain that we worked so hard to divest ourselves of. Is it any wonder that our politicians then tend to be, well, politicians? We're selecting for ego, ambition, and narcissism in our leaders. How is that a good idea?

Eug · Jan 20, 2009, 10:15 AM

I think everyone's going to get their pictures taken with Barry. I'm guessing many people will be disappointed once they see him though, as he seems rather 2-dimensional.

SpaceMonkey · Jan 20, 2009, 10:16 AM

Originally Posted by SpaceMonkey

I'm thinking about it. I'll probably head to the Mall shortly. I don't expect it to be fun.

Okay I've come to my senses and decided to sit this one out. Crowds frustrate me.

design219 · Jan 20, 2009, 10:22 AM

Originally Posted by Eug

He's just another politician after all.

You probably have to be an American to understand why today is special. Racial tensions are certainly not unique to this country, but our society has definitely been shaped by it. Just 50 years ago, blacks were forced to drink from different water fountains, go to separate and inferior schools, sit in the back of the bus.

This is a bid deal. I'm not black, but even I can feel what a tremendous moment in history today is.

Eug · Jan 20, 2009, 10:31 AM

Originally Posted by design219

You probably have to be an American to understand why today is special. Racial tensions are certainly not unique to this country, but our society has definitely been shaped by it. Just 50 years ago, blacks were forced to drink from different water fountains, go to separate and inferior schools, sit in the back of the bus.

This is a bid deal. I'm not black, but even I can feel what a tremendous moment in history today is.

Our last Governor General was Chinese. Our country's railroads were built on the backs of the Chinese. The Chinese had been discriminated against for decades and worked as virtual slaves when they built the railroads.

Our current Governor General is black, and spent her childhood under the rule of Duvalier in Haiti.

So yeah, I really don't see what the big deal is personally. Some may argue that the Governor General's job is just a ceremonial one, but others (like me) may argue that it's unfortunate that a country like the US of A still values race so much in 2009. The ironic part is that he's 50% black and 50% white. Baby steps I guess.

Doofy · Jan 20, 2009, 10:34 AM

Originally Posted by Eug

The ironic part is that he's 50% black and 50% white.

45% black, 5% Arabic, 50% white.

design219 · Jan 20, 2009, 10:38 AM

Originally Posted by Eug

The ironic part is that he's 50% black and 50% white.

What's ironic?

Eug · Jan 20, 2009, 10:43 AM

Originally Posted by design219

What's ironic?

Heh, do I really have to explain it?

Everyone's chanting "All hail Barry, our first black prez!" etc.

They'd be just as justified as yelling "Go go Barry, another white prez!" going by his ethnic background.

design219 · Jan 20, 2009, 10:57 AM

Originally Posted by Eug

Heh, do I really have to explain it?

Everyone's chanting "All hail Barry, our first black prez!" etc.

They'd be just as justified as yelling "Go go Barry, another white prez!" going by his ethnic background.

You have got to be kidding, right? You think because he is of mixed ethnicity he is not thought of as a black man? What country do you live in? And showing your distain for the man by calling him "Barry" is just sad and pathetic.

Dakar V · Jan 20, 2009, 11:01 AM

Originally Posted by design219

What's ironic?

He's not black.

SpaceMonkey · Jan 20, 2009, 11:01 AM

The inevitable has occurred:

"Metro confirms that a passenger was struck at Gallery Place-Chinatown. Red Line trains are turning back at Farragut North and Judiciary Square Metrorail stations. Riders can expect major delays while emergency personnel respond to the scene."

http://dcist.com/2009/01/person_stru...e.php#comments

Supposedly the Mall east of 14th St. (basically the base of the Washington Monument) is full to capacity.

Doofy · Jan 20, 2009, 11:06 AM

Originally Posted by design219

And showing your distain for the man by calling him "Barry" is just sad and pathetic.

Dude, that's his name. You're sounding like one of those parents who calls his son "Christopher" and then gets pissy when everyone calls him "Chris".

osiris · Jan 20, 2009, 11:07 AM

Originally Posted by Dakar V

He's not black.

But his wife is, right?

osiris · Jan 20, 2009, 11:09 AM

btw not at the inauguration. I'm inside watching three streams on the internets. It would be exciting to be there though, but I'm not big into the political scene anymore.

Dakar V · Jan 20, 2009, 11:10 AM

Originally Posted by osiris

But his wife is, right?

I don't now her family history, so I'm not qualified to comment.

Eug · 11:44 AM

Originally Posted by design219

You have got to be kidding, right? You think because he is of mixed ethnicity he is not thought of as a black man?

You have got to be kidding, right? You think because he is of mixed ethnicity his white heritage no longer counts?

Originally Posted by design219

What country do you live in?

Kanuckistan

Hence my earlier comments about Chinese and Haitian Governor Generals.

P.S. I ran into the one on the left after her stint as GG, at the movie theatre when I went to see The Departed. I guess she likes violent gangster movies.

P.P.S. If you liked The Departed, you should see the original, Infernal Affairs. Awesome movie.

Originally Posted by design219

And showing your distain for the man by calling him "Barry" is just sad and pathetic.

Originally Posted by Doofy

Dude, that's his name. You're sounding like one of those parents who calls his son "Christopher" and then gets pissy when everyone calls him "Chris".

Heh. And actually his own family called him Barry. Methinks someone in this thread needs to take a chill pill over this historic event.

shifuimam · Jan 20, 2009, 11:44 AM

Originally Posted by design219

You probably have to be an American to understand why today is special. Racial tensions are certainly not unique to this country, but our society has definitely been shaped by it. Just 50 years ago, blacks were forced to drink from different water fountains, go to separate and inferior schools, sit in the back of the bus.

This is a bid deal. I'm not black, but even I can feel what a tremendous moment in history today is.

I'm not black and I'm all-American, yet I don't think that the day was special.

Barack Obama is just another person. See, I don't base someone's value, impact, or importance on the color of their skin. I base it on what they DO and who they are on the inside. And if Barack Obama implements a bunch of half-assed socialist programs that are bust and bankrupt in fifty years, he'll be no different than FDR - who's a whitey, like the majority of the population.

What's saddest of all is just how many people voted for him primarily because of skin color. The leader of your country is not going to be better or worse based on genetic traits that are entirely out of his control (Michael Jackson notwithstanding).

Originally Posted by Eug

Quite frankly I'm a little surprised at all the hooplah. He's just another politician after all.

But Eug! You're so wrong! He's different than all the other politicians. He's change we can believe in! Don't you know that he's going to be totally different from any other Democrat or president because he's part black?!

Originally Posted by Eug

They'd be just as justified as yelling "Go go Barry, another white prez!" going by his ethnic background.

Originally Posted by design219

You have got to be kidding, right? You think because he is of mixed ethnicity he is not thought of as a black man?

Do you seriously think that's what Eug was talking about?

Obama is roughly 50% black and 50% white. He is an equal mix of both ethnicities. In that regard, he is just as much white as he is black - fifty-fifty.

You know how all-white cats have a tendency to have two different eye colors? They usually end up having one blue and one green, or one blue and one gold. A cat like that is just as much blue-eyed as it is green- or gold-eyed...it's a 50% split.

The point is that Obama's race should be irrelevant. For one thing, it does not contribute to his skills or credentials as a politician, a leader, and a policy maker. For another, he's half white. If skin color matters so much to general public, that should probably be taken into consideration, in which case we're only 50% to the end goal of "eradicating racism" - we'll only be 100% if we elect someone who is 100% black.

See how silly it is to make a big deal out of the nonexistent correlation between a person's outward appearance and their capabilities as a human being?

waxcrash · Jan 20, 2009, 12:17 PM

Originally Posted by shifuimam

What's saddest of all is just how many people voted for him primarily because of skin color. The leader of your country is not going to be better or worse based on genetic traits that are entirely out of his control (Michael Jackson notwithstanding).

And what about the racist people who didn't vote for him because of his skin color? You don't think that's sad?

waxcrash · Jan 20, 2009, 12:22 PM

Originally Posted by Dakar V

He's not black.

Unfortunately, here in the U.S. we still follow the one-drop rule so he is considered black.

Dakar V · Jan 20, 2009, 12:28 PM

Originally Posted by waxcrash

Unfortunately, here in the U.S. we still follow the one-drop rule so he is considered black.

Speak for yourself.

waxcrash · Jan 20, 2009, 12:35 PM

Originally Posted by Dakar V

Speak for yourself.

I don't believe in the one-drop rule, but it is deeply ingrained in American culture that historically goes back to slavery. The U.S. is the only country that follows the one-drop rule. I hope someday we abolish it, but until we become more progressive a majority of Americans will consider Obama a black man.

Dakar V · Jan 20, 2009, 12:41 PM

Originally Posted by waxcrash

I don't believe in the one-drop rule, but it is deeply ingrained in American culture that historically goes back to slavery. The U.S. is the only country that follows the one-drop rule. I hope someday we abolish it, but until we become more progressive a majority of Americans will consider Obama a black man.

I'd be curious to see that question taken to the streets. I imagine some entertainingly awkward conversations with white folks.

The other big reason Obama is black is because the black community (and too a certain degree, the media) wishes him to be (or "accepts" him as such) – much like Tiger Woods. But at the end of the day, a cynic could point out that there's still a white man in the Office.

Eug · Jan 20, 2009, 12:45 PM

Originally Posted by Dakar V

But at the end of the day, a cynic could point out that there's still a white man in the Office.

Not that there's anything wrong with that.

Originally Posted by shifuimam

Michael Jackson notwithstanding

Well, to be fair, Michael Jackson doesn't count, because he isn't human.

I am racist, in that I exclude those who are not members of the human race.

shifuimam · Jan 20, 2009, 12:53 PM

Originally Posted by waxcrash

And what about the racist people who didn't vote for him because of his skin color? You don't think that's sad?

How in the world would you infer that from what I said?

It is always and unequivocally lamentable whenever anyone judges a person's worth, value, capabilities, or potential (positively or negatively) based on genetic traits they can't control, like skin color or hair color or where they were born. Obviously physical disabilities play a part, since a person with cerebral palsy can't really legitimately work as a UPS delivery guy, but you get the idea.

And this exact sentiment is why I have such a huge problem with things like Affirmative Action and higher education scholarships that include ethnicity as part of the eligibility requirements. A black guy who got a 1600 on his SAT is no more or less deserving of a scholarship than a white guy who got a 1600 on his SAT...the sad fact, however, is that the black guy is more likely to get the money, because he was lucky enough to be black.

"Celebrating diversity" has been perverted into the idea that we need to first and foremost look at a person's outward appearance before considering who they are as a human. I'd much rather be color blind and only consider people for academic accolades or employment opportunities based solely on their accomplishments and potential.

MallyMal · Jan 20, 2009, 01:12 PM

So, where do we draw the line on when a person is black? From what some of you are saying there really aren't any black people in the US at all save the people who came directly from Africa in recent times. Just about every single "black" family that have been here for generations have either white or Native American blood in their family. Therefore, none of these people are black. That would mean that I'm not black.

Dakar V · Jan 20, 2009, 01:16 PM

Originally Posted by MallyMal

So, where do we draw the line on when a person is black? From what some of you are saying there really aren't any black people in the US at all save the people who came directly from Africa in recent times. Just about every single "black" family that have been here for generations have either white or Native American blood in their family. Therefore, none of these people are black. That would mean that I'm not black.

I think the lesson to be learned there is, "We no longer need these labels."

That's not to say one can't (or shouldn't) be proud of their african roots. They just shouldn't define themselves solely (and more importantly, superficially) by it.[/editorial]

osiris · Jan 20, 2009, 01:20 PM

bingo on the "We no longer need these labels."

Dakar V · Jan 20, 2009, 01:23 PM

I forgot to note, even if needed them, they're no longer accurate.

Doofy · Jan 20, 2009, 01:27 PM

Originally Posted by MallyMal

So, where do we draw the line on when a person is black? From what some of you are saying there really aren't any black people in the US at all save the people who came directly from Africa in recent times. Just about every single "black" family that have been here for generations have either white or Native American blood in their family. Therefore, none of these people are black. That would mean that I'm not black.

What're we saying, I think, is that we don't care what race anyone is*.

You're Mal, you're a Mac user and general all-round cool dude.
Will Smith is an entertaining actor. Oh hell yes.
James Earl Jones makes the earth shake when he speaks.
Stanley Jordan makes me want to retire when I see him play.

Oh, you're all black? We don't care. You're either cool or you're not cool.
Same goes for the "Irish Americans", the "Italian Americans" and what not. Why can't you all just be "Americans"?

(* Unless you're Welsh, obviously).

waxcrash · Jan 20, 2009, 02:12 PM

Originally Posted by shifuimam

How in the world would you infer that from what I said?

It is always and unequivocally lamentable whenever anyone judges a person's worth, value, capabilities, or potential (positively or negatively) based on genetic traits they can't control, like skin color or hair color or where they were born. Obviously physical disabilities play a part, since a person with cerebral palsy can't really legitimately work as a UPS delivery guy, but you get the idea.

And this exact sentiment is why I have such a huge problem with things like Affirmative Action and higher education scholarships that include ethnicity as part of the eligibility requirements. A black guy who got a 1600 on his SAT is no more or less deserving of a scholarship than a white guy who got a 1600 on his SAT...the sad fact, however, is that the black guy is more likely to get the money, because he was lucky enough to be black.

"Celebrating diversity" has been perverted into the idea that we need to first and foremost look at a person's outward appearance before considering who they are as a human. I'd much rather be color blind and only consider people for academic accolades or employment opportunities based solely on their accomplishments and potential.

I wasn't surmising anything from what you said. You stated that you thought the "saddest" thing was people voted for Obama based on his skin color. I agree with you that it was wrong that people voted for him based on that condition, but I personally think it's more deplorable when people vote against someone based on hate or skin color. I wasn't implying that you are racist and apologize if I offended you.

I agree with you that it is wrong to judge any person based on their physical appearance.

Eug · Jan 20, 2009, 02:17 PM

Originally Posted by waxcrash

I wasn't surmising anything from what you said. You stated that you thought the "saddest" thing was people voted for Obama based on his skin color. I agree with you that it was wrong that people voted for him based on that condition, but I personally think it's more deplorable when people vote against someone based on hate or skin color. I wasn't implying that you are racist and apologize if I offended you.

I agree with you that it is wrong to judge any person based on their physical appearance.

[cynic]

My guess is that there were a lot of voters out there that voted against McCain because he was white... and because there was a (partially) black competitor.

My guess is that there were a lot of voters out there that voted against Hillary because she was white... and because there was a (partially) black competitor.

[/cynic]

Like I said earlier, I too might have voted for BO if I were American, but it would annoy me that so many would vote for him purely on the basis of colour.

SpaceMonkey · Jan 20, 2009, 02:19 PM

Plenty of people cast votes for equally stupid reasons.

Eug · Jan 20, 2009, 02:24 PM

Originally Posted by SpaceMonkey

Plenty of people cast votes for equally stupid reasons.

True dat.

design219 · Jan 20, 2009, 02:25 PM

Originally Posted by shifuimam

See, I don't base someone's value, impact, or importance on the color of their skin.

Well thanks for telling us how enlightened you are... I'm sure that what you said goes for 99.5% of the people in this forum.

The point is that it is a special day to millions, and I don't see how anyone can disagree with that, or worse, dismiss it. It was a special day for Catholics when Kennedy won. It was special for Texas when Bush won. You have to acknowledge the dramatic change this signals for people who have suffered open discrimination within their lifetimes.

Eug · Jan 20, 2009, 02:29 PM

Originally Posted by design219

Well thanks for telling us how enlightened you are... I'm sure that what you said goes for 99.5% of the people in this forum.

The point is that it is a special day to millions, and I don't see how anyone can disagree with that, or worse, dismiss it.

Sure, we can acknowledge it, but some of us would like to move beyond this type of thing.

Last I checked, this is not 1959. It's 2009.

SpaceMonkey · Jan 20, 2009, 02:38 PM

Originally Posted by Eug

Last I checked, this is not 1959. It's 2009.

See you in the time travel thread!

besson3c · Jan 20, 2009, 02:48 PM

It doesn't matter what percentage of Obama is black, he looks black, and the importance is not in and of itself his being black, but the symbolism behind him being sworn in while appearing to be a black man to most. All of this is about symbolism.

As for affirmative action, I believe it was a necessary stop gap measure to level the playing field when blacks were genuinely at a disadvantage. I'm not sold on the idea that this is still strictly necessary. There has to be a cut off point sometime, it can't go on forever.

waxcrash · Jan 20, 2009, 02:57 PM

What was with Aretha Franklin's hat?

Eug · Jan 20, 2009, 02:57 PM

Originally Posted by besson3c

It doesn't matter what percentage of Obama is black, he looks black, and the importance is not in and of itself his being black, but the symbolism behind him being sworn in while appearing to be a black man to most. All of this is about symbolism.

Which brings us back to the original point.

Symbolism is fine, but content/ability is even better.

Originally Posted by waxcrash

What was with Aretha Franklin's hat?

Pic or link needed.

Dakar V · Jan 20, 2009, 03:01 PM

Originally Posted by besson3c

It doesn't matter what percentage of Obama is black, he looks black, and the importance is not in and of itself his being black, but the symbolism behind him being sworn in while appearing to be a black man to most. All of this is about symbolism.

More correctly, I think it's a case of perception = reality. If everybody thinks he's a black guy, and he got voted in under that perception, then for all intents and purposes, a black guy got voted in as president, regardless of one of his parent's color.

Of course this will lead to all sorts of qualifiers in the future (I've heard the reference of Bill Clinton claiming he was the first "black" president, and in the future what of the first "full-blooded" black president, etc.)

Laminar · Jan 20, 2009, 03:06 PM

Originally Posted by design219

Well thanks for telling us how enlightened you are... I'm sure that what you said goes for 99.5% of the people in this forum.

The point is that it is a special day to millions, and I don't see how anyone can disagree with that, or worse, dismiss it. It was a special day for Catholics when Kennedy won. It was special for Texas when Bush won. You have to acknowledge the dramatic change this signals for people who have suffered open discrimination within their lifetimes.

Finally, Texans are no longer judged by the drawl in their voice, but by the content of their character.

design219 · Jan 20, 2009, 03:29 PM

Originally Posted by Laminar

Finally, Texans are no longer judged by the drawl in their voice, but by the content of their character.

ew.

Dakar V · Jan 20, 2009, 03:33 PM

Originally Posted by Laminar

Finally, Texans are no longer judged by the drawl in their voice, but by the content of their character.

I thought the only character texans had was their drawl.

Next you'll tell me canadiens are more then "eh?".

calverson · Jan 23, 2009, 09:52 AM

I heard it sucked.

dcmacdaddy · 02:45 AM

Originally Posted by SpaceMonkey

Supposedly the Mall east of 14th St. (basically the base of the Washington Monument) is full to capacity.

I was on the south side of the Mall between 14th and 15th streets and it was CRAZY madhouse. There was four of us and we got in place by 9:45AM in sight of a jumbotron screen. About 11:00AM I had to pee and worked my way out through the crowd to the porta-johns. It took me about 15 minutes to travel about 150 yards. I encountered a LOT of hostility from people who thought I was trying to take their space, even though I was moving <em>away</em> from the central part of the Mall towards the periphery. After my visit to the porta-john I was able to get about five (5) feet into the crowd before I gave up and texted my friends telling them where I would meet them afterwards. It was not worth my time or my sanity to try and fight my way through the crowds to where my friends were standing. I heard the ceremony without seeing it on the jumbotron screens and that was fine with me: I don't like large crowds to begin with and this was the biggest crowd I had ever seen in my 14 years of living in DC and working on the National Mall*.

*Before leaving Washington, DC in August 2006 I had lived there for 14 years and spent nine (9) of those years working on the National Mall at various Smithsonian museums. (So I knew what the kinds of crowds were to be seen at various events that occurred on the National Mall.)

subego · 03:19 PM

Haven't seen anyone mention the gigapan 14-bajillon megapixel image of the event.

If you zoom in on Obama, just to the left you can catch Clarence Thomas taking a nap.

I also understand you can find Yo Yo Ma taking a picture of the inauguration on his iPhone.

To give you an idea...

Zoomed out:

Zoomed in: