Pushback

Quite a reach. I didn't know [or care] about Guiliani's "race".

Will he stand up to radical Islam? Thats all I care about.

I find the concept that Obama might not be "black enough" beyond the pale. Now we have a query as to Giuliani being "white enough"? Good grief...

Of the Republican candidates yet on the horizon the only one I'd consider would be Giuliani. So if the Republicans want to speak to moderate America he would seem like a good candidate.

He's a lawyer, so he understands law and constitutional issues.

He has been through h*ell in a handbasket during 9/11 and proved he has what it takes in terrible times.

NYC is one of the largest economies in the world in one place, so he has management skills the present administration could only dream about when it got to the White House.

However, the Republicans haven't been speaking to centrist America for a long time. So maybe he hasn't a chance.

Maybe I'll vote for Bill Richardson - he also looks like a decent candidate, although from the other party. Maybe he's not "Hispanic enough", though. No?

I don't think the issue "Is he white (or whatever) enough?" of importance. The issue of "Is he or she right enough?" should be what matters.

William Miller, who ran as VP candidate with Barry Goldwater, was a Roman Catholic. Republicans have nominated a Catholic for national office.

Just a correction - John Kerry is not Irish-American - don't you remember this story? His father was of Czech Jewish stock - his grandfather picked the name Kerry off the map - and his mother was of the Boston brahmin Episcopalians - the Forbes family....

What are you talking about?
Al Smith was Italian American.
He was the first Catholic & first Italian American nominated for President.
He changed his name.
Check your facts.

Poles, Norwegians, not "White"? How ridiculous.

You should have said White Anglo Saxon Protestants, not just "White." As an Italian-American you have somewhat of an argument that we are not quite as White as Northern Euros. But damned. Including Poles and Norwegians in that groups is just absurd.

Bad editorial. Needs a re-write.

Eric Dondero, Chair
Libertarians for Giuliani

Let's see; Obama is not black enough, and according to some,Bill Clinton was the first black president. Excuse me, but I'm confused, really.

What in heaven's name are you blabbing about. Ronald Reagan's ancestors were from Ballyporeen, Ireland. The first of Eisenhower's family tree arrived in Pa in the mid-1740s, but that did not change his ethnic identity . When Ike saw the concentration camps he said it made him "ashamed to be German".

In addition to omitting William Miller, you also ignored a number of other facts that were contradictory and therefore inconvenient to your bias, er, I mean position.

MYTH: "This is a party, after all, that has nominated precisely one ethnic immigrant candidate for national office in its history--Greek-American Spiro Agnew."

FACT: Calvin Coolidge's VP, Charles Curtis, was part Native American, spent part of his early life on a reservation, and is the first person with acknowledged non-European ancestry to reach either of the two highest offices in the United States government's executive branch.

FACT: Herbert Hoover's family's name was originally Huber, and he was of German (Pfautz, Wehmeyer) and Swiss (Huber, Burkhart) descent.

FACT: 1948 VP nominee Earl Warren was the son of Swedish and Norwegian immigrants.

It took me five minutes on Wikipedia to uncover these facts. Say, when do I get a job with ABC "News"?

This is an inane article, clearly created just to have a controversial headline in a vain attempt to generate buzz. It adds nothing useful to the debate over the 2008 presidential race, and is ill-conceived on a number of different levels, including its use of false analogies to draw questionable conclusions.

This is a sick article that clearly displays the state of the mainline media. We should be beyond this type of senseless discussion that is designed only to create controversy where none exists.

Actually, this is another MSM attempt to reassure themselves that Guiliani will not be the Republican nominee - because they know what that will mean. Moran has a point, but it doesn't work against Rudy in today's GOP and it works very much for him in the general election.

Agreed that it works FOR Giuliani in the general election. And it won't hurt him one bit in the primaries. Not One Bit. I am a Republican and a conservative. I am constantly talking 2008 with other conservatives and other Republicans. An Italian-American nominee does NOT strike fear into their hearts. That's because, you know, most conservatives, like most Americans, are NOT racists and are NOT bigots. In fact, given that more DEMOCRATS voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964 than Republicans, perhaps we should be asking whether it's realistic to assume that Democrats will actually nominate an African-American for the presidency.

If Mr. Moran would actually visit a community west of the Boston-NYC-DC corridor, he might learn something.

(And no, flying to Seattle, San Fran, or LA doesn't count. Sorry.)

The editorial has failed to clearly pinpoint the division between Anglo Saxon Protestants and the Ethnic Americans. Ethnic Americans have yearly emotional parades honoring their old countries while thanking the USA (or America) for giving them the economic opportunities that those who remained in the old countries "failed" to achieved. Anglo Saxon Protestants do not have ethnic parades as their ancestors are the children of the Protestant Reformation represented mostly by northen European peoples, zealots carrying the flag of the truth religion. They have the "mission" to protect the USA from internal and external enemies that propels them to spread the "american dream" to other ethnics around the world. As for Guiliani, he doesn't have a chance to be elected president of these United States of America. The WASPs establishment founded, built and by the "grace of God", manages the USA. The Ethnics are here just as guests or worse, just passing by. Will the USA eventually change its political structure to embrace Ethnic Americans? Probably yes, but not without internal and costly conflicts among all Ethnic groups supporting their own political and economic ambitions. Or,We would rather have the Anglo Saxon Protestants continue "managing" the country for all of us.

The author is steeped in the identity politics that are so important in newsrooms and faculty lounges, but are (thank God)becoming far less important in the rest of the country. How else do you explain the absolute mania for Obama among left-wing white whites and the strong support for Guliani among many social conservatives. Send this guy back to teaching sensitivity in some intellectual backwater (like Harvard or U of W at Madison).

Terry Moran, this is the most ignorant waste of space I have ever read. "White enough??" Arte you truly that stupid, that emersed in the left side of the political world that you honestly think anyone on the Right cares if he is Italian? The Left is much more concerned about "diversity" , ethnicity, and skin pigmentation than the Right. I do not favor Guiliani on Gun Control, I disagree with him on Abortion as a moral point but I happen to agree with him that it should be a State's Rights issue, and I think he is probably one of the most solid candidates on defending this great country. But I'm not sold, and his heritage has zilch to do with it.

Telling about Republican's? No, the only thing telling is your apparent ignorance, and ABC's idiocy in putting this claptrap up on their server.

This is an interesting article by Terry Moran that is unfortunately distorted by bias and ignorance. In addition to some of the ethnic Republicans already named, let's not forget Barry Goldwater, who had a Jewish father (the family name had been Goldwasser). And let's also not forget the Irish backgrounds of Nixon and Reagan. Giuliani may or may not win the GOP nomination, but that has nothing to do with his ethnicity. Let's put aside the cartoonish image of a monolithically WASP Republican Party.

Liberals like Terry Moran are always looking at skin color and race. Just look at the way the sportscasters at the super bowl were always talking about how it was the first time two black coaches made it to the super bowl, instead of their accomplishments. Most people look beyond skin color and are not as racists as liberals like to make out.

Are Iraqi's White Enough?

The Vietnamese Were Not ...

The North Koreans Were Not ...

The Somalese were not ...

And the blacks in our own country were not ...

Yet the Europeans in WWII were ... which is why Democrats supported WWII but none of these other wars.

Democrats did not believe blacks could govern and so promoted slavery in our own country.

Democrats do not believe that non-Elitist-Liberal-Lilly-whities are capable of governing themselves which is why they do not support liberating Iraqis.

They are not white enough to deserve to vote.

When it comes down to it the democrat party is founded on principals of the most vile form of racism.

The day an Iraqi votes to eliminate their right to vote ... or a black man descendent of slaves in our nation ... votes to remove their right to vote ... is the day I'll believe that the Democrat Party's racist viewpoint on people is accurate.

The conservative blogs are already reacting to this crap: http://race42008.com/2007/02/17/terry-moran-calls-republicans-racists-and-bigots/

Our "ethnic" presidents were the two Roosevelts (Dutch origin), Hoover and Eisenhower (German origin). The rest of our presidents origins are in the British Isles including Ireland which was under a British flag until 1949. John Kennedy and Ronald Regan were from the despised other in the British Isles, i.e., Roman Catholic earning their "ethnic" designation for the religion of their ancestors not their place of origin. Today we sometime use the designation "Irish" to mean Catholic in origin but yet one third of our Presidents were descendants of Irish Prostestants the first being Andrew Jackson and the last Bill Clinton. Despite all the analysis, this is the way it has been so an Obama-Giuliani contest for the Presidency would indeed break new ground.

If ABC News is going to judge Americans by their ancestry, how about pointing out that Ronald Reagan was the son of an Irish Catholic. You know? Reagan? Remember him? The guy you hated for twenty years. Ring a bell? No?

What a waste. Yet another example of the so-called "objective" media trying to drum up a race controversy where none exists. I only see the media even suggesting race as an issue here, and they call us racist. Why not spend resources on real news rather than imagined outrages.

What a fatuous story. I guess the real story ought to be; "Are the pretty-boy and pretty-girl reporters intelligent enough to be allowed to present their insights to millions of Americans ? "

What a silly article by a reporter (?) whose animus toward Republicans is so long-established, and so intense, as almost to tag him with the bigotry of which he accuses Republicans. Yes, of course, Mr. Moran, Republicans can't abide Italians, Jews, Poles, Norwegians, Swedes, Catholics, Irish or any people other than White Anglo-Saxon Protestants. Tell that to Governors Volpe and Cellucci of Massachusetts, or Governors Del Sesto, DiPrete and Carcieri of Rhode Island. Or the Republican gubernatorial candidates in Connecticut in 1982-1990 (Rome, Belaga and Rowland), who were, respectively, a Jew, a Jew and an Irish Catholic. One could go on and on, but why bother? As soon as a commentator wheels out the "social construction" of race, you can be sure he has no actual argument.

Apparently Mr. Moran didn't do sufficient research--as many of you have pointed out--and for that he should be held accountable.

The main point of the piece, however, is in my opinion being missed by many of you.

I didn't take this as an effort to create a race-controversy around giuliani, but rather a satire attempting to point out the inanity of the alleged race-controversy surrounding obama.

I could be wrong, but that's what i took from it, and in that light it isn't nearly so useless, wasteful our offensive as many of you seem to claim.

I am not quite sure what to think of this. My first impression was, it must have been a slow news day. After I finally got through this artcle, I realized it sparked some thought which I assume was it's intent. When I finished thinking, I came to the revalation that it must have been a slow news day. I look longingly to the day when news outlets report news instead of trying to make it. What an expectedly terrible argument.

Yep, the Republican Party is full of nuthin' but a bunch of racists. Thanks once again for proving that there is absolutely no bias in the mainstream media, Terry.

Mr. Smith:

Apparently your brain cavity is a vacuum as it pertains to the history of the Southern Democrat and we must remember that the most beloved president ever is Republican Abraham Lincoln. Remember his Emancipation Proclamation.

I suggest a little research is prudent before you show your ignorance. You might want to research also Ex-Klansman Democrat Robert Byrd of West Virginia.

Whatever the case you either are ignorant or you are just simply a liar.

And no, I am not a Republican.

Terry, I guess you failed to notice that its been the Democrats not Republicans who've traditionally nominated the "whiter" candidate. Is there a whiter person in the world than Albert Gore Jr. or John F Kerry? The original JFK was clearly whiter than Richard Nixon (and so too were George McGovern and Hubert H Humphrey!). You may also remember Ronald Reagan "dutch" as a Republican ethnic who did ok with the parties base.

Easily the stupidest article or essay on which I've ever wasted five minutes...

Some significant errors in the article:

John Kerry is not Irish American. The name "Kerry" is not an Irish surname; it was a name contrived by his Central European grandparents when they came to the U.S.

The Republicans HAVE nominated a Catholic for national office. William E. Miller was nominated as Barry Goldwater's running mate for Vice President. Miller was Catholic and a graduate of Notre Dame University.

Moreover, President Reagan's father was Irish Catholic, making Reagan half-Irish and from a Catholic heritage. One member of his Cabinet called Reagan "A better Catholic than many I know"

Moran should know that given the extensive number of Republican office-holders throughout the country who are either Catholic or ethnic, it is only a matter of happenstance that few of them have made it to a national nomination. Guiliani's candidacy is a natural outgrowth of these demographics.

Good grief. Don't these excuses for journalists have anything else to do? White enough, black enough. Everything is race, not race. Can ABC PLEASE hire someone without an agenda or at least with half a brain.

Race, gender
Mormon contender
the boys of Bohemian Grove,
playin' Texas holdem'
in money-lender's clothes.

Who do the boys bow down to?
Moloch deals, but not to you.

So is it Moran or Moron? I've never been sure.

One would hope that a national journalist would be capable of something better than this inane drivel. And are you media liberals ever going to get over your morbid obsession with race?

Do we have to put up with foolishness like Terry Moran's post for the next two years?!?!! Only a member of the elite media would be concerned about whiteness and blackness. The voting public is looking for competence.

The accusations toward Mr. Moran in these blogs are interesting. He has been accused of being extreme left wing and extreme right wing. He has been complemented for his intelligence and blasted for his ignorance.

"Republicans have never nominated a Catholic for national office."

Hey, Terry: Ever heard of William E. Miller, Barry Goldwater's vice presidential running mate in 1964? Miller was a Catholic who attended parochial schools and graduated from Notre Dame University.

Jack A. was right; you all missed the point of the article. Where are reading comprehension skills when we need them? I personally think that the candidate should be selected on what he or she can do. But, I think the writer was saying that people are making such a big deal and will continue make such a big deal about Obama's race, or rather "lack of whiteness," which is what Americans are still preoccupied with in 2007. Yet, that same scrutiny about Guiliani's lack of full "whiteness" hasn't been focused on.

Race shouldn't matter, but the REALITY, for those with your heads in the sand, is that it is VERY important to most Americans. It's sad, because it let's you know where America really is on that issue. I don't want an incompetent President, regardless of race...but if he REALLY is good, don't let race be an obstacle.

As for the mention of Guiliani's Italian heritage, if you've ever gone to Italy, especially in the southern region, you'll find some VERY dark Italians, almost Black in complexion. Anyone who's read anything outside of what the American history books teaches knows that Moors (who were Northern Africans and BLACK, not White as people try to categorize them now), invaded Italy and Spain and mixed with some of them. Thus, the question of the Guiliani's Italian heritage. It's not to make an issue of it, but the point was to show how people were making a big deal about Obama's lack of whiteness and not Guiliani's.

And actually for those who are questioning the Poles, if you know your American history, you would know that there has been a gradual acceptance over time of who is White in America, Hispanics (those light enough to pass) being the recent semi-inductees. There's a prediction that Asians will be next.

Anyway, remember the rift between the British and the Irish and Scottish back in Great Britain (as it was named then)? Hey, some Irish and Scottish STILL despise the British. Well it continued to shores of America to the point that some Irish were so ostracized at first they worked alongside and even mixed with some Blacks. And the Eastern Europeans, who are STILL looked down upon by some other Europeans, were treated horribly. Poles, Czechs, Hungarians, Romanians, even Germans, were not initially accepted then. Some Norwegians recently said to my friend, when asked if they were Eastern European, "PLEASE don't mistake us for THOSE people!"

Next time please try conducting a bit more research before making such generalizations. Add Reagan to your "analysis" and your insipid theory is shot all to hell.

This piece is such a masterpiece of confusion it's hard to even know where to begin, but let's start with this: the question of Obama being 'black enough' is explicitly and solely addressing the following question: Is Obama's 'blackness' such that he will command the allegiance and the votes of virtually all African Americans? If the parallel with Giuliani were a legitimate one, we would have to be able to form a question with a corresponding syntactical structure, ie, Is Giuliani's 'whiteness' such that he will command the votes of virtually all...all what? Moran wants to say 'Republicans', but 'Republicans' aren't an ethnic group, they're a political party. In the sentence about Obama the object of the preposition is 'African Americans' - an ethnic group. You can't make the object of the prepostion an ethnic group (African Americans) when you're talking about Obama and then make it a politcal party (Republicans) when you're talking about Giuliani. This is intellectual dishonesty of a rather astonishing order for a piece that is supposedly news analysis. The piece is a shameful attempt to force someting that simply isn't there into existence.

Mr. Moran wrote: "So what does this have to do with Giuliani? He's a white guy, right? Well, yes and no. Who counts as white in America has been a fluid concept in our history, and Italians have only recently--and perhaps incompletely in some quarters--been admitted to the racial club."

As a 12th generation generation East Coast Wasp whose forefathers and mothers have been Republicans for several generations, and whose great-grandfather served in the Congress, I can say to Mr. Moran, whose persnickety Irishness appears to be getting the better of him, that there is no "racial club."

I've got four sisters. Pure wasp. They all married Italians.

We are not living in the fifties, Mr. Moran. Democrat stereotypes of huge racial animosities dividing ethnic and racial groups are exaggerated, or if they are not, they result from Democrats exploiting and exacerbating racial and ethnic differences.

Grow up, Mr. Moran.

Viva America!

The Catholic Church encouraged intermarriage among races throughout Latin America. As a result racial tensions among Hispanics is uncommon. The same is happening in the US today.

The WASP led GOP is cleaning house and making room for Hispanic Americans to feel at home. Evangelical (WASP) continue to make great effort to reach out to Hispanics on both sides of the border.

Jewish Americans continue to ensure that the media remains balance when discussing Hispanics undocumented workers.

McCain and Jeb Bush have earned the respect of Hispanic Americans and as a result a McCain/Bush ticket would be unbeatable in 2008.

May God bless and keep America

flores de la hoz

Man, how can ABC publish this crap.
Terry I see you will have a short, unglamorous and annoying career.

Hey oakeshott. Your a bigger moron than Moran. You argue that Dutch and German is "ethnic", but then say that "Anglo Saxon Protestants" are the only ones that can manage the country for the ethnics. Dutch and German are no longer WASP? You need a course in European history.
BTW, it seems the ethnics did a pretty good job protecting the country in WWII. I wounder which side you would have supported?

Martin Luther King's most famous quote was his desire for people to be judged for the content of their character and not the color of their skin.

Character is important for bloggers also.

Does white-ness really get you somewhere in life..sometimes I think white does..sometimes I think that Italians can persue advantages also..concerning How White is White??..if one admits that some people just have no class at all(morals-law abiding-intelligence)..then white/black is fairly even..but when your looking into the eyes of your potential passenger in lifes road..I think you just might want to see very certain-traits..and these are Multi-Racial here in America/I think the world sees our travels in this manner-they just don't have that "enough"-stuff..How mixing white-into-white might make one a more advantagious person/??..haven't really seen that in my 53-years..and actually see the reverse of a better "mouse-trap"..I think there is a large body of "no-nothings" travelling the American road of family..Skin Color is short sightedness..and the other side of this arguement is "involvement"..between the two-(twain)..major involvement..both raciually/sexiually..that life takes on and leaves behing-->>the Invisible man.

Terry,
You pose an interesting question although your argument in fact and presumption is filled with holes and inaccuracies, the question is interesting none the less. The way your article is constructed seems backwards, taking a conclusion and building backwards to make a sloppy fit. I think by doing so you leave yourself open to charges of surgical political hacksmenship. All that being said, I’m glad you asked the question only from a sociological perspective. I am an American of Italian decent, not an Italian American. My parents are Italian American being born in Italy and coming here to make a beautiful life. I’m 49 and have grown up and have lived in New York my entire life, the bastion of progressive and so called enlightened tolerant democrat America. I’m aware of what it’s like to be an “In the middle American” and have seen it and felt it all my life. The greatest difference between the Bi-Coast Lefties and the Vast middle American Right is ONLY one of expression. The “white folk” of the south and mid west see me as an Eye-talian and are open about it and not condescending in speaking with me. They just don’t have much experience or 1 on 1 exposure and get much of their knowledge from TV, thank you Saprano’s….. But my life and experience in New York has been vastly different by comparison. Sort of the Malcolm in the middle of the ethnic melting pot. I was looked at as “well not as bad as the Puerto Ricans” and “better to have them then the blacks”. This is right out of the mouths of so called “progressive” people, to this freakin day. That is when they don’t know I’m an American of Italian decent. Just as they do to the Gays, the Blacks and the Latinos. It’s honestly bizarre and shocking to me to see what comes out of these self touting tolerant society types when they think there with “their own”. I would rather be asked if I’m “Eye-Talian” because he ain’t never seen one to my face than looked at as a “Greasy Ginny, is he in the Mafia” by an Enlightened sort behind my back.
It was not so long ago, during WW2 that Italians were also rounded up and put into “were not so sure about you camps” they were brought in and questioned, sent off to things like grounds keeping, masonry work and menial labor on both costs. Look it up. My parents would tell me about seeing them working and going back to camp at the end of the day.
So for me when I have to fill out those stupid federal and state forms where I need to declare race, well it’s never a clear choice to me. And I love when I can check “Other”.
Now, to be sure, we as decedents of Italy have some part to play in this less than 100% integration. We fiercely defend and protect our customs and heritage. We also for centuries have looked at life with a long game view. Italy, Rome, has been both conquered and conqueror many times over history, LONG history. It has a bizarre political system sometimes communist, socialist, a dictatorship, capitalist, empire, slayer and enslaved. But it’s also one of the birthplaces of democracy. The Italian people have by necessity become flexible and tolerant. “Yea, yea, OK you’re the communists and your in charge of the politics. Give it 50 or 100 years somebody else will be, want some bread and wine?” The culture is what makes up the Italian people, not the place.

I'm a lot further to the left than the other commenters here, I loathe Giuliani -- but I have to agree with everyone who's saying Republicans aren't thinking this way. In a head-to-head matchup with McCain, Giuliani's leading among GOP primary voters 50%-21%, according to a CBS poll. That's huge.

I keep hearing, "Oh, Rudy's support will go down when they learn he's pro-choice or pro-gay rights or pro-gun control, or when they see him in drag." Maybe. But Italian? We know the answer to that already. No one needs to be told that a guy named Giuliani isn't a WASP. And yet he's crushing the opposition. Terry, you've got to find a theory that fits those facts.

asdf:
Pete (not oakshotte) was intending to be ironic calling the Roosevelts, Hoover and Eisenhower "ethnic". Of course, most of their ancestors were here before the Revolution. My historical point without any value judgment was that all of the remaining Presidents had their origins in the British Isles. I never mentioned Anglo Saxon Protestants and would remind the gentle blogger that the Scottish, Welsh and Irish are Celtic, not Anglo Saxon. The Anglo Saxons were dominant in England.

This is silly. Along with this "is Guliani ehite enough?" garbage, I see also in some quarters of the left that the "is Obama black enough?" meme is being framed as something conservatives are drumming up, when that whole idea was started up by a black, liberal Sun-Times columnist named Laura Washington.

Why are the Democrats always trying to balkanize our nation by race?

Moran misrepresents the Rollins case. The problem was not whether Sicilians were (generally) considered white. The question was whether the woman might have had any negro ancestry. A person born and raised in Europe could indeed have negro ancestry (check the Wikipedia entries for Dumas and Pushkin), although this would have been unusual at the time. The court presumably would have ruled the same had the woman been English or Dutch or German. Its point was that the lack of negro ancestry on the part of the presumptive white partner in the crime of miscegenation was a point that the prosecution could never assume, but was obliged to demonstrate.

Damm Italians. They are nothing but trouble -- we should sent them all back where they came from.

The post is absurd, but the responses are priceless. I don't think I have ever seen such a shellacking taken by a blogger. Stunning.

He's kind of white, but I'm not sure. Is the Latin Poeple's (like Rudy) kind of black too? Not relly sure. They don't relly talk white (like more New York).

More European would be better for prasdnant, I think. Like regular white guy's not sort of white one's.

85 years ago....come on you can do better than that.

Hmmm. So there's a "Black Experience" which presumably doesn't include picking cotton, as that's back a bit before living memory.

But I can't think of what the equivalent "White Experience" might be without conjuring up a useless mass of cliches.

Racism will remain front and center in America, but not so much from a persistent medieval element in American society as from a major political party which believes that balkanization of the electorate will generate votes.

This is truly disgusting. I can't help but wonder if Terry is related to the execrable Rep. Jim Moran of Virginia, the notorious antisemite and attacker of eight-year old boys.

I thought this was an interesting article. While I knew about the No Irish Need Apply part of American History, the recent inclusion of Italians into the "white" umbrella was certainly news to me.

I bet there is much more European immigrant history that I don't know as well. Thanks for writing this.

Trey

I can't believe all of you commenters are taking this so seriously. It's obviously satire. It's turning the Obama thing on its head. Do you people have no sense of humor at all?

While I too think this post is pot stirring, many of the angry responses make his point or they simply don't read very well.

As an American of German descent married to an American of Italian decent, it hasn't been very long since both immigrant groups assumed their place in the racial/ethnic gauntlet known as the American melting pot.

As others posted, I am constantly treated to the Mafia 'wink, wink' or crude ethnic stereotypical jokes solely on my married surname. So the question/premise re Giuliani is legitimate even though the author was making a point about our perception of race and the foolishness swirling around Obama's race.

BTW- A couple of questions:

-Do you know why so many Boomers of either heritage don't speak their immigrant parents native tongue? [German and Italian were the language of the enemy.]

-Do you know which race is checked on Hispanic birth certificates? [Hint: Hispanic is not a race.]

We've come a long way but there are miles to go before Dr. King's color blind society based on the content of character is a reality. Obama is about to discover just how long the row he must hoe remains in his own party.

Here's a better question - Who Cares? (America's great problem is that indeed some people do care.)

Andrew Pass
http://www.pass-ed.com/Living-Textbook.html

All of this word-smithing and yet really, there are only 3 major "races" of humans; Caucasoid, Mongoloid, and Negroid. Seems most of us have forgotten or didn't pay attention when this was discussed in Life Science in school. All those of European descent are "white" or Caucasians. Asians can't be in the white club, well because they are Mongoloids. Now as far as being accepted in the American society because the culture has assimilated by learning english, and participating in the society at large, thats another story.

As far as caring whether or not Barack Obama is "black enough" or Rudy Giuliani is "white enough" is totally irrelevant. As quite a few of the posters have pointed out it's the ability to do the job that most Americans really care about. Stop trying to pull the American people apart by pointing out how different we are and start unifying the people by reminding us how "American" we are.

Except race is not a social construct.

Genetic markers for race have been found.

In a group of over 3,000 tested the genetic markers were 99.9% in agreement with racial self identification.

That is extraordinary agreement.

Taboo
http://www.aei.org/publications/pubID.23075,filter.social/pub_detail.asp

Terry,
You write that the the GOP in 2004 received "just" 50.7% of the popular vote, intimating that is a bad thing. Tell me, if you can, how many times has a Democratic candidate for president garnered more than 50.7% of the vote in the post-war era? Would you be surprised to know it has happened only once? Just LBJ's 60.7% in the 1964 election. Truman, Kennedy, and Clinton all failed to top 50% in their 4 combined electoral victories, and Jimmy Carter barely eked out a win in 1976 with "just" 50.1% of the vote.

In the 15 presidential elections since the end of WWII, the winning candidate has pulled less than 50% of the votes 6 times (in addition to Truman, Kennedy, and Clinton twice for the Dems, Nixon and Bush II both polled under 50 in their initial wins). A Republican winner has topped 50% seven times, a Democratic winner just twice.

In contemporary American politics, 50.7% of the popular vote in a presidential election is not something to dismiss.

Terry is a moron.

Republicans find conversations about "race" in general off-putting, and when others start tossing off accusations of racism or sexism we immediately start sniffing around for an agenda or ulterior motive, particularly when Republicans are given blame for historic racism committed largely by Democrats.
Claiming Republicans have a problem with Italians is ludicrous. We have an agenda and vote for people who mostly share that agenda. If it's Margaret Thatcher or Rudy Giuliani or Condi Rice, so be it; if it's Ward Cleaver that works just as well.
We're well on our way to a majority of the Jewish vote, at which point no doubt they'll be thrown off the "victim" bus and onto the "white privilege" bus. (In fact that's already happening.)
Cubans are overwhelmingly Republican, we just don't make a big deal out of it, and of course the various purveyors of Hispanic identity-politics do their best to pretend Cubans don't exist.
We Republicans are a big tent of ideas and ideology, not race and identity politics. If the people who identify with us are skewed to white males and Cubans that has no bearing on whether our ideas are good or bad; it simply represents a snapshot in time.
As more and more people grow tired of identity politics they'll drift toward other issues, like economic prosperity and national security, and Republicans will naturally gain both popularity and diversity.
No one will see it, though, because Republicans don't find race a compelling topic. "Diversity" will quietly creep up on us while we're patting ourselves on the back for once again capturing 67% of the small business vote.

Wow, Terry, you're taking it on the chin with this article.

I appreciate what you were trying to do. I think that many on the Left don't realize how irksome it is for those of us of ethnic Catholic stock to be seen as "Just becoming white". It is a rewrite of history for one, especially when it comes to the Irish, and frankly, people like being white!

That's the great unsaid thing that people will dance around, but won't come out and say: Never tell someone who's white that they aren't or were once not seen as white. For that matter, don't tell Hispanics that they aren't white, either*. Yes, almost a majority of them see themselves as white (sorry, I don't have the stats at hand, but were published within the last few months). I didn't realize how much I loved my ethnicity until I heard about this "Irish not white" garbage.

*My bishop made a huge faux pas during our "racial harmony" Mass recently. He talked about the suffering of the (Mexican) Indians at the hands of Europeans. Whoops! That might have played well with Northern Native Americans, whose history is quite different, but it greatly hurt the feelings of the Mexican parishioners: he was in effect saying they weren't white and simultaneously denigrating their forefathers.

If Terry Moran was a European journalist, he would be served with a subpoena within days for breaking anti-racism laws.

If Terry Moran was a marginally competent journalist, he would have not written this article. Further, he would have done even the most basic of fact checking to find the actually ethnic background of the men he names in the article.

If Terry Moran was in the least bit proud of his profession, he would post an immediate mea culpa and retract this article.

If Terry Moran was the least bit honestly concerned about race relations in America, he would immediately, and not under threat of contract termination, produce and distribute a public apology to the Guiliani, Obama, and Kerry families.

If Terry Moran's editors were the least bit not racist, and at all concerned about their reputation, they would immediately put out a retraction of this article, and pull Terry Moran from blogging on ABC owned websites.

If the people of this country were the least bit concerned with prevening the further poisoning of the well of public discourse, they would contact the FCC and roundly criticise Terry Moran's on air reporting.

This piece is less ambigious in it's racism, and more openly racist than most of the racist websites and organizations that ABCNEWS has spent thousands if not tens of thousands of man hours attacking through their media properties.

This is the end of American discourse if ABC continues on this trend.

Is Terry Moran smart enough?

The jury verdict is unanimous!

You are a fool.

Been shaking my head over some of the clueless comments posted here.

Maybe, just maybe, Terry Moran is suggesting that "Is Giuliani white enough?" is as stupid and pointless a question as wondering whether Obama is "black enough."

Anyone here ever read Swift's "A Modest Proposal?" Well, I haven't, but as I understand it, it's a classic example of savage irony in which Swift, with a straight face, suggests poor Irish families sell their children ... as food.

Everyone has to calm down. Terry was simply poking fun at this issue that is rarely talked of in America; an issue that some may not want to admit that is true, and has been true for quite some time.