Obama calls black people 'a mongrel people'
Barry's turn on "The View" daytime show evinced some interesting comments from the president, including his anthropological observation that African Americans were "a mongrel people.
Sam Youngman writing in The Hill:
When asked about his background, which includes a black father and white mother, Obama said of African-Americans: "We are sort of a mongrel people.""I mean we're all kinds of mixed up," Obama said. "That's actually true of white people as well, but we just know more about it."
What did the president mean? Mr. Youngman covers for Obama's little gaffe by explaining what he really was trying to say:
The president's remarks were directed at the roots of all Americans. The definition of mongrel as an adjective is defined as "of mixed breed, nature, or origin," according to dictionary.com.
Obama did not appear to be making an inflammatory remark with his statement and the audience appeared to receive it in the light-hearted manner that often accompanies interviews on morning talk shows.
Well, gee Sam. Thanks for that convoluted, twisted, forced explanation as well as your interpretation of audience reaction:
The president was referring to the fact that there are very few "pure" members of the African race in America. Nearly 300 years of mixing black and white, largely as a result of the "freedom of the slave quarters" granted the master of the plantation - a legacy of rape - most African Americans are of mixed race. His comment about white Americans as mongrels is problematic and more of a stretch.
Judge for yourself:
The laughter sounds more nervous than mirthful. And what about his statement that "That's actually true of white people as well, but we just know more about it...?"

I think it would come as something of a surprise to Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, and other racialists that they are "a mongrel people." And the idea that African Americans are more aware of this is unproved.
Despite Youngman's spin, he can't hide a definite gaffe made by the president - one that will be discussed in the days ahead.
Hat Tip: Ed Lasky
FOLLOW US ON
Recent Articles
- The NYT Prefers its Own Conspiracy Theories
- Would the FDA Pass Its Own Audit?
- War By Other Means: Demographics
- The Trump Administration’s Support for the Israel-Azerbaijan Strategic Partnership Can Benefit America
- This U.S. Under Trump is Strengthening Critical Minerals Sovereignty
- Upheaval and Pushback
- Why Do Democrats Hate Women and Girls?
- There is No Politics Without an Enemy
- On the Importance of President Trump’s ‘Liberation Day’
- Let a Robot Do It
Blog Posts
- Nina 'Scary Poppins' Jankowicz's ex-NGO partner makes clear 'bankrupting Tesla' is his most important accomplishment
- America’s federal court judges: a self-anointed priesthood.
- Yvette Clarke: Don’t fire the bureaucrats, they’re the efficiency experts!
- Big Balls to the rescue: DOGE saves a terabyte of data destroyed by USIP employees
- As Trump’s EPA tries to recover ‘green’ slush fund dollars, Native communities face energy blackouts
- In Britain, ‘transphobic toddlers’ are the new menace
- One outrage after another: Europe is lost
- Judicial misconduct allegations shake legal system
- Look at all the benefits of socialism!
- French right-wing leader Le Pen banned from running for office
- The case for Alberta as the 51st US state
- Putting tariffs into perspective
- Iran’s nuclear countdown: Can Trump hold the line?
- Putin in the crosshairs
- I'm looking through you -- where did you go?