Most negros have been spoonfed that they have to vote for obama. And they all follow inline like lambs to the slaughter. McCain needs to get down wit the bros. to win this election.

McCain needs to adress the problems that black people face... So many of them are drug addics, illetirate, un-employed and on

welfare and robbing people and having too many babies. We need to solve their problems to make our streets safer and not

have so many prisioners.

Just because "Osama" is a negro dosnt mean he can fix their problems. Yeah, and what have the f*cking demoncrats done for

the country lately besides give more free gub'mint cheese to the negroes? At least big john isnt a secret muslim trying to

overthrow tridishinal family values like "osama" obama!!!

74ohn2kq http://www.902889.com/463221.html > hk0y0ttwivts7kca [URL=http://www.862311.com/623487.html] 2stvpuexrd9 [/URL] 9rbgxaq0

I personally feel that Obama will be a great leader than Clinton and Bush.He is one of them who effected worstly by rasism row----------------------------
jimmy

Suffering from an addiction. This website has a lot of great resources and treatment centers.
http://www.treatmentcenters.org

olyuzu91xr http://www.709646.com/506051.html > 81ffh0uiv2fqisq [URL=http://www.332315.com/733869.html] disid43h0oowu24 [/URL] 2ba027ngpuqe

Clinton has taken Kentucky and Obama is right there in Oregon.
The Democratic race for nomination is still very much alive - and most likely to be decided by superdelegates - as CNN points out clearly

http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/05/20/primary.wrap/index.html

If you're tired of waiting around for those super delegates to make a decision already, go to LobbyDelegates.com and push them to support Clinton or Obama

If you haven't done so yet, please write a message to each of your state's superdelegates at http://www.lobbydelegates.com

Obama Supporters:

Sending a note to current Obama supporters lets them know it's appreciated, sending a note to current Clinton supporters can hopefully sway them to change their vote to Obama, and sending a note to the uncommitted folks will hopefully sway them to vote for Obama. It's that easy...

Clinton Supporters too .... !

It takes a moment, but what's a few minutes now worth to get Clinton in office?! Those are really worth !

Sending a note to current Clinton supporters lets them know it's appreciated, sending a note to current Obama supporters can hopefully sway them to change their vote to Clinton, and sending a note to the uncommitted folks will hopefully sway them to vote for Clinton. It's that easy...

cool post dude 10x http://groups.google.us/group/xxfreex ">finalfantasyxxx

This was posted:
"Bill and Hillary Clinton operate like the Democratic version of Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld. No dirty trick is too low. In addition, Bill Clinton had much fewer accomplishments in his eight years than either Jimmy Carter or George Bush senior had in their four years each."

Name the "tricks" sir. Name them, with links to sources. (sound of crickets)

Ane here's a link for the person who wrote that, since he obviously isn't aware of Bill Clinton's accomplishments.
http://pearlyabraham.tripod.com/htmls/bill-legacy2.html
To name a few Highest Homeownership Rate in History, Over 21 Million New Jobs, Moving From Record Deficits to Record Surplus, Fastest and Longest Real Wage Growth in Over Three Decades, ETC. ETC.

To quote,

"If you review the website for the leading organization for women (National Organization of Women) you CLEARLY see their choices to fight not only for women's rights, but against racism, homophobia, economic injustice, etc"

In other words just another far-left extremist group.

I've asked several passionate Obama supporters to name one thing he's done in the Senate that would persuade them to vote him in as President. They can't name one. But they're sure he'll make a great president. Yikes! Are we that stupid to dream up a Wonder Boy and expect him to deliver? He's a joke. He started off big because those Iowans can't handle a strong woman unless she's making pie in the kitchen. Give me a break. Hillary is by far the best candidate and has shown that she can actually get things done.

PREVIUOS QUOTE: "Sexism vs. Racism! Are we REALLY surprised we've arrived to this level of analysis? I, for one (as a liberal white man), stand by my sisters. If you review the website for the leading organization for women (National Organization of Women) you CLEARLY see their choices to fight not only for women's rights, but against racism, homophobia, economic injustice, etc. (the sections are easily seen and identified). If you visit the leading African American organization's website (National Association for the Advancement of Colored People) you do NOT find clear choices that support women's rights, gay rights, etc. Their subsections speak of youth, education, economics, etc. but they don't seem to care for women or gays (not even black women or gays)."

That's bogus logic that assumes a white male (without an "official" organization) would not fight for those very same things under the consitutional right of ALL CITIZENS. This kind of pissing contest serves no purpose and word-smithing website mission statements is as naiive as many have called Obama.

To evaluate the candidacy of a person based on such a microscopic set of wording of divergent organizations which happen to have one or the other as part of it's demographics is not only naiive, but laughably so. It is simply a way of convincing ones self that they are being "logical" instead of "emotional" about their selection. We've seen that level of self-delucsion for 8 years with George Bush.

But, as usual with the Democrats, they just don't practice what they preach. Sure, it's all a love-fest between all the diverse factions, until there's power at stake. Then they turn into the very power-hungry, dirty political tactics they've claimed so long was the GOP domaine. No matter who wins, if it's a Democrat, this stank will not wash off as easily as they seem to think it will. Geraldine demolished a political lifetime of accomplsihment with a serious case of "political victimzation". Then tried to cast the blame elsewhere.

You know she was really right about some things, and dubious in motive and stupid in execution.

If Hillary genuinely is the better candidate, why is she running a terrible campaign? Is she going to run the country the same way she ran her campaign? That's something to think about. She might not be such a great executive after all considering everything that's happened within the last year.

All the backstabbing going on here reminds me of home.

Once again it is all about race....How about women are about 50% of the population and blacks are about 20% of the population, so it only makes sense that the black candidate should immediately be nominated over the woman. Blacks have been subjugated for 400 years, women, since Eden. Get in line!

kd4uozfjoofa http://www.1015934.com/423458.html > 6ieiqyh2ezq9i0ycu [URL=http://www.862943.com/757417.html] ejkt9uuf2 [/URL] c71y6fqtyu

wow awesome i love you __) http://groups.google.com/group/ringtonesa ">ringtones_y_iconos_gratis_para_el_celular_audiovox_htm

See www.againsthillary.com and will you see how much of a pass the media and Obama have given Hllary Clinton.

When is the last time you heard a negative story about Hillary Clinton on broadcast television?

Heard of Rezko, yes.
Heard of the Peter F. Paul lawsuit
against the Clintons. No? why not?
Depostions will be taken this year.

Media bias in favor of the Clintons.
Obama, the media, and talk radio,
have ignored most of negative stories
about Clinton See below.

www.againsthillary.com

The media repeats her false claim
that she is winning the popular vote.

From RealClearpolitics.

Note also the number of states Obama won by more than 35% but yet the media made little mention of Obama's huge spin.

Meanwhile one line will be taken from a Barack or Michelle Obama speech, distorted in meaning, and repeated to public thousands of times.

Case in point the Michelle Obama in Madison speech, where she says really proud of my country. Take a listen and note the applause. Note also Obama won by "white working class" Wisconsin by nearly 200,000 votes.

Here what she actually said.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bQIjE6Diez0

ABC spliced togther that greatest hits piece of Rev. Wright. Can't even count how many times that was played.
Now you have people think those snippets of 3 sermons were repeated every Sunday over the last 30 years. Wright confirmed that Obama was not in church for those 3 sermons. Obama was in chuch for Audacity to Hope.
Listen to the sermon.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H73WqSj1-aI

Nafta-gate
Canadian Broadcast corporation exonerates Obama and said the Clinton campaign contacted their embassy, not Obama.

Snubgate,
After the state union speech Obama turned to answer a question from Senator Clair McCaskill. The New York Times and ABC cropped McCaskill out of the picture and accussed Obama of turning away from Hillary Clinton.

There is quickness on the part of the black community to label anything that is not embraced by them as racist. Conversely, there is hesitancy to recognize when those of color make angry and racially derrogatory comments toward the white community that this too is racism. Perhaps, this is a part of the reason that Obama does not sell well among some white working class Americans. Michele Obama's thesis, some of Obama's comments from his own book as well as the Rev. Wright tends to feed into this dynamic. One questions the truthfulness of his rhetoric regarding acceptance of differences and his promise to unite rather than divide.

WestVirginian said, "...How funny, when White Voters cast their ballots for a White Candidate over a Black Candidate by 60%, the media calls them BIGOTS. When Black Voters cast their ballots for a Black Candidate by 99% nothing is said about bigotry. "

There's a mountain of difference between the two. Whites were never the property of others in America, nor subject to lynch law. Nobody judge ever said of that 'the white man has no rights which the black man is bound to defend.".Never was there a time when they were forced out of neighbourhoods to keep up the property values. Electing another white person at the expense of a black simply on the basis of skin colour is another instance of the history. Electing a black opens a new page, in which African Americans are seen as legitimate even for the highest office -- something that is not in doubt for whites.

The fact that you all miss this shows exactly why the West Virginia votes were tainted by open bigotry.

snowy2 said, "The less educated white voters so smugly dismissed here and elsewhere will have the last laugh in November. Given the choice between a smooth talking lawyer and an old soldier whom do you think will come out on top?"

If there's one thing worse than a 'less educated voter' it's someone posturing as a better educated voter by using 'whom' in the wrong place.

Why do the HRC supporters are livid that black people back Obama, but find no irony when women freely admit they are voting for Hillary because they want a woman president? When HRC runs as the first woman president? This makes my teeth hurt.

Why all the hatred? Gender and race prejudices have occurred by Americans, both Black and White. Just because a woman votes for Clinton does not mean the woman voted simply because she and Clinton are women. Just because an African American votes for Obama does not mean that the African American voted for Obama simply because both he or she and Obama are Black. Did it ever occur to Americans that people believe in their candidate of choice to deliver the American Dream and make our lives better? Both Clinton and Obama are competing for the same goal, one will win, one will lose. Individual supporters for both candidates know why he or she chose either Clinton or Obama, which may not have anything to do with gender or race. Why has it not occurred to anyone that the most important thing in this election is to vote? Let your choice be known by casting your ballot. As for leading the country, both candidates have given their all to win the Democratic nomination and I would be honored to vote for either candidate in November. The challenges that both candidates faced were unimaginable, but they both perservered. If how either of the candidated ran his or her campaign is any indication as to how he or she will run our country, I say I cannot wait to cast my vote for the Democratic nominee in November.

Joni, are you wearing a flag pin? Has it come to this, that your party, the party of Lincoln is reduced to a gadfly? Rush seems desperate to prove his relevance by way of Operation Chaos. What's good for him may well be the end of the GOP's relevance.

The way I see it is that the biggest problem in America is Racism. Not the economy, not the war. We can not function as a country as long as this exists. I believe that only bad things can come from Obama as President. We have already put ourselves in the position that he has to be nominated. If they choose Hilary, who is obviously the better canidate and would most likely beat Mccain in November. It becomes a racial issue. If Obama loses the election in November, again its going to be about race.

We have to let go of all this Politically Correct BS and except the world for what it really is. Accept it

Bill and Hillary Clinton operate like the Democratic version of Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld. No dirty trick is too low. In addition, Bill Clinton had much fewer accomplishments in his eight years than either Jimmy Carter or George Bush senior had in their four years each. One of the many things that worries me about Hillary Clinton is that she is going to have an agenda to push through all the things that SHE would have liked to have done in the 1990s, whether the country is ready for it or not or can pay for it or not. Anyone who is so eager to wield that kind of power is exactly the person you would NOT want to be president. Most of the Democratic party establishment opposes the Clintons- ever consider why? This is why.

http://www.usasurvival.org/ck05.14.08.html

Does anyone know anything about this one ?

Investigators to Release Reports on Obama's Communist Connections:

Lets face it boys and girls - this race is about race. It is about the hypocrisy of race. The left is soooo ready for this to be over so they can stop pretending one of their two candidates is a racist and concentrate on the real racists - the right.

You know, the party which unprecedentedly appointed two black Americans to the post of Secretary of State. The party which nominated - against a liberal firestorm of smears - Clarance Thomas to the supreme court. Too be fair, JFK appointed Marshall, but then JFK was as far removed from today's left wing as was Ronald Reagan. Ask not what your country can do for you,,,, would be labeled a far right wing hate speech today.

Where was I, oh yeah - race hypocrisy. Remember Howard Dean's idiotic comment about the only colored people at an RNC function would be the kitchen staff? Wow, that opened checkbooks didn't it? Of course, the left is happy to ignore that a black American is not sitting in Howard's chair, aren't they. It seems the kitchen staff analogy fits the left much better than the right. Demonstrably so.

So, while you lefties hold your noses and call each other names - don't run out of race baiting bullets. You will need them whenever this kabuki theater plays out and you go after the biggest racist of all.

I truly find it hard to believe that all these people with college educations would vote for someone who will lose in Nov. without Hillary. Plus, he is not experienced. That is scary. I am college educated and wealthy. I don't understand what the Obama supporters are thinking. ??

If you are "truly" a Democrat and not a "fan" then common sense will prevail and you will support the party regardless of who the nominee is. Hate speech,sexist talk and votes rooted in racism is more about individual character and upbringing. You can't blame Obama for your hated of Blacks no more than the next man can hold HRC responsible for his dislike for women in positions of authority. It is unfortunate that these two candidates "un-corked" feelings and thoughts we have held on to for generations but managed to cover-up until now.There are those who are comfortable with chaos and disorder and there are those who are brave enough to acknowledge their anger there fear and want to break out from it. I am urging those of you "Democrats" who truly desire change to stand up and say enough of the percentages and the endless bickering we have a common cause ; healthcare,jobs,mortgage crisis, Iraq war and we have an opportunity to put stop to this by uniting behind a Democrat for the office of President regardless of who it is.

Now we read (on cnn) that Hillary is being urged to reject the votes of "racists." I suppose that means anyone who doesns't vote for Obama. Can we get Obama to reject his racist cabals? You know, the ones who are only voting for him because he isn't white?

OBAMA:
Poor judgement - Hamas, Cuba etc.
Little experience in Senate
Black Liberation Theology
Bittergate
Bill Ayers
Caucus leader
Rev. Wright
Resko
Flag pin
Can't win the working class voters
Majority of pledged delegates

CLINTON:
Lifetime of experience serving America
Re-elected to second term in Senate
Winner of the popular vote
Winner of Largest states
Winner of swing states
Winner of Red states
Wins working class vote
Won Florida and Michigan without campaigning
Leads in support from women
Knows many world leaders personally
Can BEAT McCain
Stronger with the electoral vote already
Tough, tenacious, a real fighter

Now, if the democrats want to win the White House in November they can shoot themselves in the foot going with Obama or go with a winner - SENATOR HILLARY CLINTON

I think if she tells all people who are voting for her in order to not vote for Obama (because he is black) as requested by David Gergen (CNN) then Obama should ask anyone who is voting for him only because he is black not to vote for him as well.

Psaw wrote: Taxonomy at work, keeping Obama, a man with small accomplishments, at the fore while a more competent and experienced woman - have a generation older - is expected to step aside, quite early, give the boy his moment.

There is no test for who is qualified. It's just our own opinion of who would be best. To try to analyze who is the better candidate is somewhat futile. Obama has qualities I see that she doesn't have (in my opinion) and these are vital enough to garner my support. Experience comes in many ways and can't always be quantified on a resume. His view of the problems we have and his attitude in resolving them appeals to me. I believe he is quite capable of finding the solutions we need. After all, every president has hundreds of advisors and technicians to support them. Hillary is okay but appears to be more of a politician than a statesman. But I would pick her in a heart beat over McCain. I wonder how many people are locked into the mindset that we finally have a qualified woman candidate and we aren't to be denied? I was a Hillary fan for as much the idea of why not give a woman a chance. After all its a given she would be infinitely better than Bush. But Obama shouldn't be considered a skunk at the garden party. After all we all want the best candidate we can find to support don't we? Irrespective of gender or color right? If one is going to champion the cause of Hillary because she is a woman then you better not complain of all the past sexism we have endured. You can't have it both ways.

It is NOT OVER until someone crosses the threshold in required delegates. Until then, the process should be allowed to proceed.

http://pacificgatepost.blogspot.com/2008/05/clinton-and-capitulation.html

It would be undemocratic to do otherwise.

To all Hillary supporters:

It's about time you put aside your pride and emotion and think deep and hard before nursing what will clearly amount to a dumb decision like vote for McCain or stay home or write in Hillary.

You may think you are doing Hillary a favor, but in reality, not only are you digging her political grave but that of Chelsea as well.

Hillary and her supporters will be held 100% responsible if the dems looses this election.

Obama's supporter's and other progressives nation-wide will never forget if you help derail this golden opportunity to put an end 8 years of Bush/Cheney/McCain nightmare.

It amazes me that Obama supporters classify anyone who supports Hillary Clinton is white, uneducated, and racist. They cannot conceive that a highly educated multicutrual person with a high income does not buy his empty rhetoric and constant back pedaling.

What's the difference between working class whites in Oregon and Kentucky? One voted for Obama and one voted for Clinton. It is all cultural. People in Oregon are comfortable with people that are from different backgrounds Kentucky is not.

There are segments in this country that are still stuck in 1950. Anyone that does not recognize this divide has been under a rock. This does not mean that ALL people are bad. You just have pockets of "undesirables" in ALL races.

....Democrats are the party of victims and special interests. Of course it's candidates are going to claim racism, sexism, and every other sympathy ploy in the book. Talk in broad cliches about "hope" and "change" and the evil GWB - but don't touch any real issues....

Are you kidding me?? The Republican Party doen't represent special interests??? Ever heard of corporate America and all their lobbyists that Republicans sleep with? Look at all the consultants McCain has gotten rid of in the past 2 weeks while he cleans house so as not to appear to have any lobbyists in his anti-lobbyist campaign.

The only real issue is to rectify the damage done by Bush/Cheney. Everything else Obama accomplishes is frosting on the cake.

Barack Obama never said, "The evidence shows that Hillary's support among Americans, hard-working Americans, Black
Americans is eroding. I have a much broader base according to those facts." Billary chose to play the race card. Barack started out avoiding the race issue as long as he could. Even blacks refused to support him at first. Even now he is trying hard not to portray himself as a "Black" candidate.

This is incredible to me. First - other black men have run in the primaries and have not been overwhelmingly supported by the black community - ie Rev Jesse Jackson and Rev. AL Sharpton. Could it be that they are voting for Sen. Obama because they believe in him and not just based on his race. Stop putting the black community on trial here - we have already proved that we don't just automatically support someone because they are the same race as we are. Secondly Senator Clinton may have had to deal with some mysogenistic suggestions but Senator Obama has had to deal with being accused of being Muslim (as if just being Muslim is some horrible thing), supporting terrorism being Anti-American, racism, sexism, every thing was thrown at him and now that he is ahead in the primary his campaign is being diminished by talk that the media somehow supported him and people were somehow against women????? Is this the same media that plastered Rev. Wright's remarks all over the TV, Internet and Newspapers for weeks???????

Its amazing how with every step this man takes in the primary someone is there to push the bar higher and make excuses for why he is winning that have nothing to do with the fact that he has run a good campaign.

Oh wait no - its just another day in the life of a black professional!

States that had Democratic Party caucuses instead of primaries went for Obama - and the caucuses are not particularly "democratic" - I couldn't vote, because the machine-like schedule closed the window too early for people with fulltime work other than being an activist. I don't object to Obama because he's black - I'm just tired of 40-something boys running the planet - I see a mature woman who isn't as pretty as the man, and like shallow Americans, we go for the prettier face that talks nice. If Obama were in Clinton's place, no one would have the audacity to tell him to quit so the girl could go ahead: his maleness somehow trumps with an extra wallop with Dems because he's darker skinned than she is. If she were black, I'd still vote for her: we've had men, we've never had a woman - and that is the Great Taxonomy at work, keeping Obama, a man with small accomplishments, at the fore while a more competent and experienced woman - have a generation older - is expected to step aside, quite early, give the boy his moment.

Pshaw

Anybody running for office or voting in an election is naieve or ignorant to not realize that people vote against some candidates as much as they vote for others. And yes it's based on race, on sex, on all sorts of reasons. It's just the way humans are. And since no one is ever required to justify their choice before they vote then it doesn't really matter how they make up their mind. I think there are way too many misinformed and stupid voters that cast their vote for totally irrational reasons. But this is how we choose to do it and we all have to live with it. This is a comment on society not just our voting habits. It's how we normally live.

Most of you are giving people way too much credit for intelligence and political savy. Most people don't know who their members of congress are. When I hear people saying they will vote for Hillary because she supports the gas tax holiday for the summer- with not plan to follow, I can rest easy that I won't be sparring with Mensa members anytime soon. Geraldine Ferraro is zipping around like Henny Penny squawking sexism and chauvinism- where the "bleep" has she been since- (oh, I know she taught at Harvard, and tried unsuccessfully twice to run for the Senate) - losing the VP race in 1984- but that race gave her a national platform and she did not use it- she's an old gas bag who thinks this alignment with Hillary is going to reserect her somehow. There are a lot of women both Republican and Democrat who don't like Hillary's sense of entitlement- being Senator is fine- but it's just as good at Obama being senator. Being the First Lady of Arkansas gives you experience in nothing. Being the First Lady of the US lets you prove you can be a diverting hostess. There are millions of women in the US who are successful business people, who have come up through the ranks, often raised children without help in the home, or chuaffers or a staff. These women resent her sense that she has all this experience-because the only thing she really has experience in is being embarrassed globally by her husband. I am fairly confident that if you got Bill on a lie-detector he would have to admit that he really doesn't want his wife to be president but is being "supportive" because he owes her. We need to keep this dynamic out of the White House at all costs.

Racism and sexism are terms frequently misapplied to certain types of preferential voting. The essence of each is antipathy - a racist is AGAINST someone of a different race, belittles that individual, and wishes to exclude him or her from opportunity. On the other hand, when candidates are reasonably equal in qualifications, it is neither racist for an African American to be FOR the black candidate, nor sexist for a woman to prefer the female candidate, particularly since both groups have suffered past discrimination. Ideally, nothing but qualifications should matter, but the reality of personal preferences in helping members of a group gain their deserved share of recognition is understandable. More important, because it is based on fondness rather than hatred, it should never be confused with the reprehensible bigotry and desire to exclude that characterizes true racism or sexism.

RE: gayuccpastor - thanks for an interesting take on your position. However, neither NOW nor the NAACP are running candidates for president, the Democratic party is.

Do you really feel that Senator Obama's policies are constrained to those of the NAACP?

Democrats are the party of victims and special interests. Of course it's candidates are going to claim racism, sexism, and every other sympathy ploy in the book. Talk in broad cliches about "hope" and "change" and the evil GWB - but don't touch any real issues.

Hillary Clinton is fooling her supporters. The Only reason she is staying in this race is to raise as much money as possible from her pissed of supporters and pay off debts.

So Obama won in Oregon..how come none of the press has reported that the photo of the huge crowd "waiting" for him was taken just after the Decemberists finished playing a free concert and before much of the crowd could leave?? Why abet Obama's consistent trickery which first began in IL when he orginally was 'elected' after using his usual tricks to dispose of the other legitimate candidates? He his a first-rate IL polititico all right

Rajesh said...Obama is winning because of the Republican party support. The dumb thing is the super-delegates are not seeing this and joining Obama's campaign.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Wow, Obama is ahead becasue of Republican support and stupid super-delegates??? Thank God you finally figured this all out for us. We need to tell as many people as we can before its too late.

@ Rajesh: So you believe Obama is winning because Republicans are voting for him? What planet are you living on? Do you really think those 75.000 cheering white people in Portland, Oregon were Republicans?

Donna said....Sen. Obama's hiring practices appear to be sexist and racist. Look at the composition of his senior staff and advisors.
The seats at the Senator's table seem to be mostly filled by men.

So Donna would you like millions of voters to not for Obama due to your insight?? If you are pretty sure about this then I'll assume you are correct and vote against him.

Jaxon is correct. Edwards lost and we're not hearing his supports cry racism or sexism.

But Obama supporters would be right to cry foul if his delegate lead is overturned.

Then you will have a guy who played by the rules getting robbed. I think that poses a much bigger threat than bitter Clinton supporters.

Don't forget Obama's got millions of supporter too.

"Obama is winning because of the Republican party support"
Rajesh

Hmmm, so they ran out of context sound bites of reverend Wright for two months every thirty seconds on Fox to GAIN support for Obama?, or encouraged their voters to cross-over to Clinton in operation chaos?

Sounds like a sound republican strategy to me.

Racism? Mysogyny? Give me a break and quite whining!

The final two contenders for the Democratic nomination for PRESIDENT are WHO?

Folks, if your candidate doesn't win, don't play the role of a victim of some widespread social ill. They lost because the majority of people didn't like him/her. Period. Get over it. That's politics.

I voted for John Edwards. He lost. Period. Too bad I can't blame it on some form of victimization that makes it someone elses fault.

Criminy. We've been suffering through 8 years of HalliBush, Inc. and look where that got us!

By putting up a white woman against a black man, the politically ever-so-correct Democrats deliberately tried to provoke the misogynists, the feminists, and the racists. We will find out next November if that was a good idea. If McCain should win, there will be a lot of head scratchings and I-told-you-sos.

"That took an inner strength far beyond anything most of us are capable of commanding"
Rhodie

Got to agree with you there, while the party of "family values" ridiculed her for hanging with Bill I thought it was quite courageous of her to keep her family together and work through an incredibly embarrassing and hurtful time in her life.

Obama is winning because of the Republican party support. The dumb thing is the super-delegates are not seeing this and joining Obama's campaign.

Diane, is it sexist for that the majority of women are voting for HC?

What if I protested that the female vote for HC is unfair to men? I think your answer would be that the choice has always been between men.And that the sole reason for this sexism.

Now, apply this same reasoning to your question about blacks and Obama.

The candidates have always been white. And the reason for that is racism. Afterall, blacks had to WIN the right to vote (to much opposition, I might add) and that was only a few decades ago. In fact, people died for blacks to have the right to vote.

And now you're shocked that blacks would fall behind a candidate that represents for them, the potential and success that should be available to all people regardless of race or gender?

When have blacks ever voted against a candidate because they were white? Kerry and Clinton won over 90% of the black vote. And Clinton started this race with the overwhelming majority of the black vote.

For the first time in history a black person has a chance at the presidency, and fools like you howl racism.

Just remember voting for someone out of pride is completely different than voting against someone because of predjudice.

Hillary Clinton has won states that still think we are living in the 1950s. She keep mentioning that she is winning the white hard working Americans, but who she is really winning are those George Wallace, David Duke white folks who still wants the country divided by race. This is why the super delegates and regular delegates have gone to Mr. Obama. American will never heal with this kind of racisim still going and Hillary has taken this country back instead of forward with her campaign. African Americans have been voting for white men to be president in this country for years and now that man that is half African American and half white has the chance to be the President for all of the people and the Clintons and Geraldine Ferraro with her crazy self is taking this country backwards. Now Hillary is crying sexism, she will stoop to any low to try and get the nomination. The Clintons' don't own the White House and if they were decent people, she would try to end this campaign with some dignity left. Those poor working class confederate white folks that are voting for her, just don't know that she doesn't give a crap about them, Hillary is using them to get what she wants, but the Superdelegate and the American people are not falling for their scam this time.

Sexism vs. Racism! Are we REALLY surprised we've arrived to this level of analysis? I, for one (as a liberal white man), stand by my sisters. If you review the website for the leading organization for women (National Organization of Women) you CLEARLY see their choices to fight not only for women's rights, but against racism, homophobia, economic injustice, etc. (the sections are easily seen and identified). If you visit the leading African American organization's website (National Association for the Advancement of Colored People) you do NOT find clear choices that support women's rights, gay rights, etc. Their subsections speak of youth, education, economics, etc. but they don't seem to care for women or gays (not even black women or gays). The choice, while quite regrettable, is simply clear...women simply appear to more broadly fight for a range of oppressed peoples while the leading African Americans have not. As a pastor who cares about ALL people (and especially all people suffering from oppression) I must stand by the one who represent the hopes and dreams of women...and all oppressed peoples. I stand by Hillary (flaws and all - we all got 'em) May God be with us all during this difficult time of discernment.

The last time we elected an inexperienced one-term Senator from Illinois, it led to secession and civil war. Millions died. Families and communities were torn apart.

And yet - we honor Abraham Lincoln as one of this country's greatest visionaries. Lacking experience, he was forced to rely on intelligence, and a broad grasp of the forces at play at that moment in America.

We could actually elect a Black President. I suspect that a lot of the bluster about voting for McCain rather than Obama will evaporate as November nears and White working-class voters - like myself - realize that McCain would be a disastrous choice. His bravery and service to his country are above reproach. His comprehension of foreign policy and economics are laughable. He would be entirely dependent upon the power structure created by - and fiercely loyal to - George II.

For the first time in American history, a viable female candidate for the presidency has emerged. During the entire Monica Lewinsky affair, Hillary faced more intense and unwanted personal attacks than any First Lady in history. She remained rational and loyal to her family at an extremely difficult time. That took an inner strength far beyond anything most of us are capable of commanding. To the cynics who accuse her of hanging with Bill for personal gain - I can only point to Chelsea as evidence of Hillary's sincerity. It's hard not to like Chelsea, and she may one day succeed where her mother will likely fail. You really can tell a lot about someone by their kids. Whatever you think of Bill and Hillary, they managed to raise a daughter who is strong, well-spoken, and clearly unimpressed with media credentials or approval.

I wonder what Lincoln would have thought of those who would base their vote on race or gender. In some ways, this election has put the vision of Abraham Lincoln to the test. Are we a nation united, or divided? Is this election, and what it implies about our most publicly-proclaimed ideals and aspirations, merely another "Us against Them" Monday-Night Football-style diversion? Do we really "hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights.." as our Founding Fathers proclaimed?

In a less familiar line from the same document, one of the charges brought against the King of Great Britain was that "He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power." A similar charge could be leveled at Bush, and McCain is not likely to buck that trend.

Whatever transpires, it will be remembered in 200 years as a pivotal moment in history. I hope we, as a nation, can collectively set aside our emotional baggage, our sexist preferences, our racist rationalizations, and our team-sport mentalities just long enough to live up to our ideals, whatever we believe them to be.

You have one chance to speak that actually matters:

Vote.

To: Donna1000

Do you know who Valerie Jarrett is? Some call her "the other half of Obama's brain.

If Obama was prejudiced against Hispanics then why would the Nation's leading Hispanic endorse him?

As for the Asians I don't have an answer better than perhaps he just couldn't find any readily available qualified Asians to fit in his campaign staff.

Hey Donna1000,
Just a comment but why do Americans, from NASA to TV shows to politics, automatically need to have a Black, a White, a Woman, and an Asian person appear on screen, be it a Sitcom, a news show, a spaceflight, whatever. You can't erase a hundred years of racism in a few years of TV. If I lived in Spain, or Germany, or Israel or Sudan or China or wherever, the NORMAL choice would be for a local. In the US, meaning a Black, a White, an Hispanic, a Polish, Irish, Romanian......etc person. What is with you people? America has all people. Founded by Europeans just a few hundred years ago. The melting pot

DO Clinton supporters realize she is lying to them?

About the real numbers, the Party's numbers, and about her status in general?

A little like "IS" Is, a little like travel gate, and Rose law firm papers and
a dozen more Hillary whoppers. Dodging bullets being the most fun.

She is a liar. And she doesn' respect her
woozey facts supporters.

"Maybe some of the big, gaping holes in Sen. Obama's base wouldn't be there if he was hearing about the needs and perspectives of those groups from his senior staff and advisors. If you don't give people a seat at the table, you can't understand their needs and respond to them"
Donna1000

If you are talking about working-class whites then consider that one candidate turned down large sums of money to work for a below-poverty wage upon graduating from college to help steel workers in Pittsburg re-train themselves to find work, while another candidates life story has nothing in common with the working class and has nothing on record that I know of that demonstrates the willingness or action, or sacrifice to do anything meaningful for the blue collar worker.

Guess which candidate is which.

"Maybe some of the big, gaping holes in Sen. Obama's base wouldn't be there if he was hearing about the needs and perspectives of those groups from his senior staff and advisors. If you don't give people a seat at the table, you can't understand their needs and respond to them"
Donna1000

If you are talking about working-class whites then consider that one candidate turned down large sums of money to work for a below-poverty wage upon graduating from college to help steel workers in Pittsburg re-train themselves to find work, while another candidates life story has nothing in common with the working class and has nothing on record that I know of that demonstrates the willingness or action, or sacrifice to do anything meaningful for the blue collar worker.

Guess which candidate is which.

Sure we all loved Bill but this is about her, not him.

*HRC applies credits for her time in the WH as actual working experience. She takes credit for all of the good and none of the bad.

*I was turned off by the SC comments and Bill's behavior, but still willing to vote for her in the fall. She has since done even greater damage with her comments of the past few weeks.

*She votes for the war, then could not admit that she was wrong.

*She has presented the sterotypical female qualities of being mean, petty, and vindictive.

*She lies---and lies about lying.

*She is a poor general and ran a sucky campaign. She should have locked this up a long time ago, but she let Obama eclipse her. Gotta give it to him for having the right team and a great plan. This give me great confidence in him as a leader.

*She is working doubly hard to put the thought in voters minds that Obama cannot win. Interesting to see how she brings her supporters back from the brink of McCain. I believe that true Dems will vote Dem in NOV. The rest? Probably couldn't bank on them in either case.

Someone keeps posting about black voters voting for Obama. When Bill Clinton got the majority black vote, what did that make us then? Don't worry about us, we will do the right thing in Nov.

Some people vote for the obvious reasons, but the rest of us use our intelligence. Don't you think that after months of campaigning, 20+ debates and access to the internet that blacks have had a chance to compare the candidates and make an educated decision. Geez. He is a great candidate and is worthy of our support.

Good luck, America.

When you vote someone, at least you should have enough trust.

Anti-Iraq-war is the only credit for Obama. But not so sure now whom he stands for after all Uncle Wright-like connections. It will take time to prove rather than just divorcing one after another.

What else are SO FAR LEFT?
"The Emperor''s New Clothes"

One see the clothes.
One see the color.
One see the body.

Are you thoughtful or simply over exicted about the new clothes?

No blame if you admire the body.
No blame if you see the color.
But those who design the new clothes?
Not more than a bunch of political guys.

Linda @12:42
A couple of things are clear from your response.
1. You didn't read his books. I did. In fact, I just looked up the quotes you cite to be sure what I am about to say is accurate.
2. I can say with authority that you took his words out of context. The points Obama was making are the antithesis of what you claim they are. So, that makes you either embarrassingly and astonishingly ignorant or you are just another typical despicable smear artist.

JR,

Sen. Obama's hiring practices appear to be sexist and racist. Look at the composition of his senior staff and advisors. There are no obvious Hispanic or Asian names. Only three out of 15 senior staffers are female and only three out of 18 senior policy advisors are female.

The seats at the Senator's table seem to be mostly filled by men.

Donna

"I'd still like somebody to explain to me why it is when white voters go 60-percent plus for a white candidate,that's racism but if black voters go 90-plus percent for a black candidate, that's not racism."
Diane

Blacks have voted for white candidates in the past, remember president Clinton? Many of the white voters in WV and Kentucky publicly admitted that "They would never vote for a black candidate." Some comments I've heard are "you know he is from the other race and we have trouble with them" and "He is a muslim" and "I'm tired of all this Hussein stuff" Do any of those comments sound well-reasoned or informed to you?

Given the history of how blacks have been treated in this country by whites it is natural to assume that when they finally get a candidate as naturally talented and charismatic (not to mention his ideas) as Obama that a large majority would vote for him. Remember, it is the oppressed voting for their candidate, not the oppressors.

I am convinced that ever so often "the media" of all types and stripes do conspire to do certain things i.e. block out certain information like "what were the per centages of votes obtained in Oregon for both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton?".
I watched for hours and only saw on CNN the same 58% - 42% Barack/Hillary in favor of Barack although they were still counting votes. Hours later CNN still had that 58 - 42%. Nothing had changed even though a note on the screen continued to say only 51% of the votes had been counted. No other channels showed anything but Hillary's numerical per centage of victory over Obama in Kentucky. I think this was done to get back at Obama because John Edwards announced his support for Obama on the day Hillary won West Virginia, diluting the story of her big per centage win.

Another example of media conspiracy to block out certain things done by certain people they are molly codling - HILLARY - is
1. In the wee hours of the morning, before the Tuesday Kentucky and Oregon primaries, I was watching ABC news when they showed a news clip of Hillary gleefully gloating with shrill exhilaration "He's gone, and he won't be back. Now I have the whole state to myself!" She was obviously talking about Barack Obama, and the comment was made for the purpose of eliciting a resounding hateful roar of jubilee from the crowd. Hillary and her husband, Slick Willie, (Bill is reportedly dubbed "Slick Willie" in Arkansas Political arenas) are masters at inciting hateful mob mania. That is reflected in the votes in Pennsylvania, West Virginia and Kentucky.

Her above comment was crude and tacky, and I was waiting for the news to repeat itself as it usually does over and over and over again as if there are only three things happening in the world on any given day, so I could see and hear this again. Oh, I wanted to see this as I couldn't believe how low she would go.

When this news clip was run again, that particular segment of the clip with the above comment was not run with it - just everything she said after that. I continued to watch, waiting for it to come around next time. I watched the news repeat itself a number of times, but that portion never was played with that clip again.

So, I switched channels a number of times watching the repeated broadcasts of the prelude to the next day's primaries. They all ran the acceptable portion of what she said, but, NONE ran her gleeful snort, honk and gloat segment.

I'm certain that if Barack had made a similar braggadocious crow and hoot like she did, the media of all types and stripes would not have stopped running it until 32 days after they had first run it so much that Barack would have been made to genuflect, self depricate, repudiate himself, grovel and apologize to Hillary and this country. Then that would have been run 33 more days...at least.

Did it ever occur to anyone that the Clinton camp had to talk about sexism because the media completely dismissed it as a possibility. Obama only had to address racism head-on when he was confronted with a specific challenge (Wright) because there were hundreds of articles already raising the question of race. I have been fascinated by how race and gender dynamics would play out in this process, but surprised that I couldn't find a single article on sexism and gender issues that treated it as a serious issue. more likely, they did what Marcus did -- clearly people are voting for her, so there's no sexism. Meanwhile there were many many well informative, interesting, really careful pieces about racism (as there should be.)

To: garyt1708

Tell me, how have these 17 million voters been disenfranchised?
Again, wild claims by Hillary supporters with nothing, not one shred of evidence. It's as if they are living in a dream world, "if I say it's so then it is."

Like GF's claim of Obama being sexist, but then no examples of what he has done to be sexist.

Obama has won an insurmountable amount of delegates plain and simple. That is what the Dem. primary was and is, a delegate race. If Hillary didn't like that then she should've run in another party, but she does not make or change the rules for the DNC as no candidate should.

Ali,

Maybe some of the big, gaping holes in Sen. Obama's base wouldn't be there if he was hearing about the needs and perspectives of those groups from his senior staff and advisors. If you don't give people a seat at the table, you can't understand their needs and respond to them.

And, what are the odds that Barack Obama would be a U.S. Senator and presidential hopeful if many who came before him had not valued diversity? In fact, what are the odds that his father would have been able to travel from Kenya to Hawaii for part of his education if people at the University of Hawaii had not valued diversity?

The Democratic Party has traditionally been a party of diversity. I think it's an important story that Sen. Obama's senior staff is remarkably less diverse than the membership of the Party he is seeking to represent in the general election. His hiring practices are direct evidence of his values in action.

Donna

By Ruth Marcus' logic, we can rule out racism as affecting Obama because he has raised more money than any campaign prior. The logic is flawed. They both did well, but they both probably suffered because of their race or sex. Since the media never treated the gender issue seriously, it's hard to know how much that mattered for Clinton. The race issue, on the other hand, has been played and replayed.

By Ruth Marcus' logic, we can rule out racism as affecting Obama because he has raised more money than any campaign prior. The logic is flawed. They both did well, but they both probably suffered because of their race or sex. Since the media never treated the gender issue seriously, it's hard to know how much that mattered for Clinton. The race issue, on the other hand, has been played and replayed.

To all the Clinton voters who claim they'll vote McCain or write-in Hillary if Obama is nominated: What do you think all the Obama voters will do if his lead in delegates and votes is overturned?

The myopia is astounding. The same people who argue for HC will accuse the disenfranchised Obama supporters of bitterness and sexism if they refuse to vote HC in the general.

The only logical course is allow the race to play out and accept that Obama has won by the rules established early in the process.

Diane,
So let me get this straight:

"As for me, I'm a typical white person ... you know, the kind that doesn't like to be stereotyped and spoken down to. And if he's the nominee, I'll vote Republican."

Because of all the Internet chatter and blogs, you would let HRC take over the USA, because "I'm a typical white person ... you know, the kind that doesn't like to be stereotyped and spoken down to."

Hmmmmmm. Sounds pretty racist to me!

You want to fix this country or make a racist statement?

Now that Senator Clinton has had her day and I think she hoped donations to bring down here debt it is time for her to take a long walk with Bill away from her million dollar a week advisors and start to mend fences for the future of our nation.
She needs to make some definitive statements to her base.
Racism, sexism, class-ism, even republicanism is a disease of fear. It has been at play in trying to move the electorate back to the idea that HRC was our most experienced and familiar candidate. Maybe you should fear what you don't know was a hammer that might sway voters back to the familiarity of another Clinton presidency. Clintons are familiar and well white.
A better organized, funded, energized, articulate and responsive campaign that pursued every state across America (even in KY and NV where these divides may be strongest) could not be denied. There are a lot of good people that are very disappointed and angry and willing to pull out there own isms that the reasons are pant suits and voice quality. In the end there is a nation of people that have reached a saturation point of frustration and are desperate to see someone different at the helm of our nation. They are not going swayed by guilt by association. Many of our pastors have beliefs we don't share. It's almost in the job definition of a cleric to attempt to make connections that are not entirely logical in their love for their parish. If you are of color and you look at our nation you can see it through the other side of the lens. Some things will look bigger and other things smaller. We, white people, allowed African American men to die from syphilis when we had treatment for them. We allowed them to infect others. People of the age of Rev Wright witnessed hate in its most blazing heat with lynching, church burning, separate fountains, bathrooms, and schools. Did we allow millions to die in Africa when treatment was available for HIV? Are you close enough with an African American to have ridden with them in a car and seen the behavior of some police officers? The statements of Rev Wright are sad and wrong but they have a context and Obama articulated this brilliantly in his books and in his speech in Philadelphia. This is not just beautiful rhetoric this is a man who has a sense of mission and not just ambition.
We need Sen. Clinton to quell this ferment and believe many will come to reconcile that they too were speaking out of fear. She need to "find her voice" of reconciliation. She needs to tell those that expressed color as the reason they could not vote for Obama that they are wrong and that she has and will vote for what is best for our nation and our world. She needs to tell her followers that sexism is not a reason to blame Obama. It does exist but would you rather be a white women or a black male? That Obama carries the flame forward for our nation and that she will need all of her base to energize with her in making this a historic moment in our nations history. If it is true that "hard working white Americans" are listening to her then it is her voice that needs to bring them behind Obama.
There will be few moments in our lives that define her or us better than now. Our future lies in building a unified party and nation.

This is the best election campaign I've seen in four decades. Unfortunately, based on the commentaries, and the various vote counts, the eventual winners are still likely to be prejudice, ignorance, selfishness, and denial.

CNN has been running an investigative piece that every angry voter should take a time-out and watch: "Out of Gas, We Were Warned". It's about oil and gasoline, but more to the point, it's about failure to confront the bigger problems we face.

Abraham Lincoln made a suggestion in 1862 that applies very nicely to our self-indulgent, self-absorbed nation today in 2008:

"We must disenthrall ourselves, and then we (might) save our country..."

If you believe we can survive another 4 years of business as usual in this country, you're whistling past our collective graveyard.

Thanks liberal patriot.

I'd still like somebody to explain to me why it is when white voters go 60-percent plus for a white candidate,that's racism but if black voters go 90-plus percent for a black candidate, that's not racism. It seems to me that white voters are more willing to vote across racial lines than black ones.

As for me, I'm a typical white person ... you know, the kind that doesn't like to be stereotyped and spoken down to. And if he's the nominee, I'll vote Republican.

I totally agree with Rove. I really don't understand why the Democratic Party has abandoned the candidate, Hillary who has a better chance of winning in November. I am very, very disappointed with the Democratic Party. Wehn we lose in November, they have nobody else to blame but blame themselves. We are going to prove to the Republican Party that we can lose three times in a row.

Think about it for a second, Hillary has won Texas, California, Pennsylvania, Florida, Michigan, New York and other big States. On the other hand, Obama has won the traditional Republican small States, such as Idaho, Utah, Kansas, North Dakota, Wyoming, and other traditional Republican States. Do you think that he can win in those States in November? NOT! It's my opinion that the Democratic Party is fooling itself but members of Congress and the House would have to answer to the people when January comes and John McCain wins the White House.

We may live in the best country in the world, but I am deeply saddened by what I have seen floating across the 'net in response to this Hillary/Obama thing.

Why can't people understand that this is a very important decision, and that it calls for wisdom and education rather than gut feelings? I have seen all manner of bigotry from both sides, but what I have seen more of is one side accusing the other side of bigotry. This is only making the problem worse. It's a "follow the crowd" mentality. If you shout that Obama supporters are sexist, some people might vote for Hillary to avoid looking sexist. Unfortunately, a great deal of people who are harboring an actual prejudice will look around and go: "Oh, so other people are sexist? It's okay for me to be sexist then." And then they quietly vote for their prejudices in the poll booth. Same thing for racism and the other side.

The best thing to do, in order to manipulate this "follow the crowd" thing, is stop with the name-calling and discuss the actual policy differences between the candidates (which are only very slight), because fair and frank discussion of issues leads to people wishing to look intelligent and informed. And then they vote for whichever candidate they think is more intelligent, so they can brag about it. Which seems to me to be a good thing. I desire intelligence in the leader of my country.

People are simple animals - quit feeding them manure.

Well I am sorry but if Obama is the nominee then really doesn't he have to repair the Democratic Party to make it in November? Don't you think looking in the mirror means yourself to reflect on your own anger issues? Remember 17 million of Hillary voters are allot of disenfranchised voters to make angry. If they stay home where will Obama be then? Obama's followers might want to take an effort to connect with the party instead of dividing it with anger and name-calling. Obama's voters are not the one's being pushed down and told to shut up. So it seems to me that if there is any mending to do it should be started from within the Obama's camp first.

She will stay in through the convention. She is hoping for and doing everything possible to engineer a major disaster for her opponent. So far as money is concerned, they have been feeding at the public trough for their entire adult lives. That's all they know. They don't even think about it. They do whatever they want to do, and they expect you to pay for it. That's exactly how they regard their constituencies- you are there to serve them, however they decide they want to be served.

Well I am sorry but if Obama is the nominee then really doesn't he have to repair the Democratic Party to make it in November? Don't you think looking in the mirror means yourself to reflect on your own anger issues? Remember 17 million of Hillary voters are allot of disenfranchised voters to make angry. If they stay home where will Obama be then? Obama's followers might want to take an effort to connect with the party instead of dividing it with anger and name-calling. Obama's voters are not the one's being pushed down and told to shut up. So it seems to me that if there is any mending to do it should be started from within the Obama's camp first.

Well I am sorry but if Obama is the nominee then really doesn't he have to repair the Democratic Party to make it in November? Don't you think looking in the mirror means yourself to reflect on your own anger issues? Remember 17 million of Hillary voters are allot of disenfranchised voters to make angry. If they stay home where will Obama be then? Obama's followers might want to take an effort to connect with the party instead of dividing it with anger and name-calling. Obama's voters are not the one's being pushed down and told to shut up. So it seems to me that if there is any mending to do it should be started from within the Obama's camp first.

Davie 11:49

Which part of these words written by his hand do you not understand?

From Dreams of My Father: "I found a solace in nursing a pervasive sense of grievance and animosity against my mother's race."

From Audacity of Hope: "I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction."

I did not create him or Bush. Obama is the racist. He has not tried to hide it. How daring to call your grandmother a 'typical white person' in a world wide speech. He dares anyone to condemn him. He will just call them a racist. That seems to put us all 'in place' real well

First, HRC does not look like a President. Second, if 99% of African Americans voted for Obama, think maybe that they finally have someone they can believe in or they hate HRC too, or they feel more comfortable with him. See below:
RACISM-
a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race

I think you whiteys are the racists, remember the toilets for blacks and whites? the back of the bus?

All who have said Clintons should be kicked out of DC, good job. MacCain too!

Obama is worldly, educated, motivated, and not polluted. He knows what is going on. By the way, I am a white Republican from Chicago. Go-Bama

Linda, I hope you feel better with all of those "quotes." Now try basket weaving because you certainly need another hobby.

I have a comment about what H.Brinkhuis said:

["I Am a Republican, and I do not trust Obama because in his church there was no white people allowed to enter."]

I'm a advocate of a republican government not a supporter of the so call Republicans of today. I'm a advocate of wisdom. I uphold Christian principles for myself, my family, my community, and the world. I believe in expressing opinions based on facts not unsubstantiated rumors.

I have attended church since I was 5 years old and have had an understanding of a personal relationship with Jesus Christ since I was 21. You find all kinds of people at church, I have attended several churches. I think a wise person does not label churches as "Black", "White", "Presbyterian", or "Assemblies Of God", God does not care about those labels, He sees each individual's heart. Every church has tendency towards a particular way of thinking in regards to politics. I dislike the fact that many preachers use the pulpit to support political candidates. I applaud preachers that expose the issues of today and encourage dialog based on applicable biblical principles.

The oppression, discrimination, and subjugation experienced by African Americans can not be denied. Obama is an individual who has decided to serve his community. Is his community perfect? Are they allowed to have their own opinions based on their own experiences? Do they all have to agree on everything? Is it right to label an individual based on the church he attends? I think we need to focus on the individual, his actions and the issues at hand. I have found myself in communities that needed servants, where I did not agree with the majority yet I loved the children and saw the needs of the community and put them first. Christ is perfect and we are not, has he forgotten about us?
If yes then we are lost.

["He should run for office in Kenya Africa there is a lot more trouble than here in the USA, and he would feel a lot better between his own people."]

Who are Obama's people, the people of Kenya, Chicago, or USA? How do we know where an individual feels more comfortable? Ones people are the ones one has chosen to serve. Ones country is the country ones one lives in and one knows where one feels comfortable.

There are people in need everywhere. The severity of individual problems is relative. A poor person in America is a reach person in Kenya. A middle class person in Kenya is wealthy person in Haiti. An unemployed father of four in Nicaragua, who has no money for the bus to go find a job, is not so different from the unemployed father of four in Chicago who can no longer make his car payments or buy gas to find a job. An American president can do a lot more to help people in Africa than many African public servants can.

People have looked at Clinton's voting record and decided. She is a qualified person as a women but her voting record as a Senator leaves much to be desired. Just to recap:
1) She twice (that's two times) voted for the patriot act
2) she voted in favor of the banking industry for the bankruptcy reform act which removes rights granted to citizen and gives untold privileges to the banking industry
3) she voted in favor of military action in Iraq and then lied about it saying it wasn't what she thought it was--puleeze give me a break.
Basically--she has given the Bush administration everything it wanted much to the detriment of U.S. citizens.

We deserve better and that is why she didn't get the nomination.

Hillary is a shrill harpie; she has the audacity to claim Bill's accomplishments as her own, but in the same breath denies that she knew anything about the Marc Rich pardon, can you say duplicity ? I think that she is most bitter at the media; for years they kowtowed to their line and made tried to frame their embarrasments in a context that would lessen their impact. Well what goes around comes around, and I don't find it the least bit ironic that the same people who enabled the Clitons for years (and on that point how can feminist support her after years of being an enabler to one of history's most famous mysoginst and sexual preditors) are now the cause of her downfall. The Clintons have acted for years with impunity, thinking that the rules that apply to everyone else don't apply to them; well that was only the case when their opponent wasn't the incarnation of every left wing and liberal fantsy, they have been beaten at their own game

Also given that the only chance Hillary has to win depends on manipulation, deception, and deceit, I think the mainstream media is being quite generous by giving her preposterous ramblings *any* credence.

Dee Olson, your anger concerns me. Have you thought about professional assistance?

"He can only give good speeches", "I'm really ahead if MI and FL count", "I have a stronger base", "Even Jessie Jackson won SC". The Clintons and their base actually believe in these and all the other rants they're making. This is a classic case of how "Shock and Awe" is supposed to work. To put people in a total state of denial so that they're paralyzed from acting. Hillary and her team have been that way since the coronation on Super Tuesday didn't happen and they had to totally regroup as they watched another campaign show them how democracy works. Obama's staff established campaign offices throughout the US, not just the "Big States". That's why they built the lead; they went after all the votes. It was nothing Obama or anyone else did to you, so Hillary and Clintonites turn that finger you're pointing at everything else and point it at yourself.
Man in the mirror.....

HC is campainging for 2012, I hope she will use her efferts to bring the party together, that is the only way I will consider voting for her, she now need to work on damge control.

A few thoughts on the victory speeches last night:

To avoid any claims of sexism, I'll start with Mrs. Clinton first (or is it sexist for ladies to go first?) Of course, that STILL leaves me open to the charge of racism, but hey, someone has to go first. I'll do it alphabetically,

1. She stated that she won the popular vote. Did she mean the KY popular vote? Or the national popular vote? If the national, well that flies in the face of reality.

2. She gave the speech in the state where she won the primary

Onto Mr. Obama

1. Different day, same words (change, blah, blah, blah, change, blah blah blah change)

2. He eloquently referred to Mrs. Clinton as a formidable opponent (I agree) and then very eloquently slammed HER for dragging out the nomination process.

Hmmm, isn't this too a slam on HER supporters who WANT her to stay in the race? Isn't this a slam against the democratic process?

3. He did not give the speech in the state that held the primary

4. He alleged that McCain wants to keep the Bush tax cuts "for the wealthy". FALSE: McCain wants to keep the tax cuts for everyone benefiting from them, which is well, everyone (Don't ya just LOVE equality ?)

Mr. Obama merely wants them on those making less than a certain dollar amount (hint: Not the "wealthy")

Obama has what? "A different group of advisers"? "A wider span of Opinions than Clinton"? That is typical coming from an Obambot. This is so far from the truth. He has almost all of Bill Clintons people advising him He has been bragging of being mentored by the biggest Left wing Liberal in the Senate (Ted Kennedy). I still don't see the change Obama is talking of. Everyone glosses over the facts about Obama. Read his book. Or is that as well another subject to stay away from. This is why people are voting in large numbers for Hillary in the democratic key states. Hillary People can't vote for Obama on just blind faith. We need answers and Obama has lots of questions he has been avoiding. He doesn't even hold open press interviews. Hillary has. What is the problem Obama you are afraid that people will not like what they see? This guy is already taking allot of lessons from the Bush administration about keeping the message on Que. I don't know about the Obambot's but I feel the Clinton years were the best years. We had so much going for us and if you lost a job due to NAFTA then he had retraining in place that gave the worker that lost the job a new carrier field. I took advantage of this and received an Associates degree in Computer Science and I have been working since 2000 in a White Collar job as a Computer Programmer. I am sure there are many more stories similar to mine. Bush by the way took the retraining program away when he made it to office in 2000. What a wonderful guy isn't he? So I really don't see the negative with another eight year of a Clinton in the White House.

I could not disagree more with the comments of Maryland, who stated the Democrats would be better at running the lives of Middle American citizens than they are at running it themselves. Those individuals from the heartland are the heart and soul of this nation while it seems the East and West coast think they are the brains. If they are, they are sitting on ther brains, and talking out their ***.
The central United States believes that we are individuals and can chart the direction of our own lives. We need for all the politicians and attorneys in this great nation to stop trying to create a law for every minor occurance that develops. We are over burdened with laws, and have no one in either the House or the Senate that has a lick of common sense.
From the moment they become elected officials there main concern is how to get money to get re-elected for the next term. Enter the large corporations and their lobby with funds as long as any vote that is benefical to the donors gets passed.
Then what happens to the opion of the loyal voters back home? Their voice is unimportant, and the political powers that be vote the money and then try to convince us that it was really in our best interest.
We are not that stupid, but money talks, and the politician hopes for short memories.
Therefore, Obama not having as much experience and maybe having some common sense, is a far better choice than having Billary again.

Hillary has presumed that the Presidency belongs to her by some unspecified right. She has done and will do anything to get it. She has cuddled up to good old Bill for only one reason. She wanted to use him to get to the White House.

Her attack ads apparently did not work so well. She has claimed that misogyny is the reason people oppose her. It couldn't be her acidic personality, her unabashed grasping for power, her thinly veiled lies..(She claimed once that she had no desire to be president, we knew she was lying then too. Who can forget her famous statement that , "We are the President!" She was caught in this campaign faking questions at a campaign event where voters- real voters were supposed to get a chance to ask questions of her. And do we really believe that she had nothing to do with the financial scandals in Bill's Presidency?) When she ran for Senator of NY, she said it was because she wanted to help the people of NY. Um...she's from Arkansas. Why didn't she feel the need to help the people of Arkansas? Simple, Arkansas doesn't have enough electoral votes AND they don't have the kind of big money connections that New York has. Hillary couldn't give a fig about the people of New York or the people of the United States. Hillary cares about what Hillary wants and she will do anything to get what she wants.

Now, Hillary is proudly courting the racist vote in West Virginia, Kentucky and elsewhere. Sure they have all kinds of new, politically correct names for these racists. What is the difference between Americans who hate based upon skin color and Arabs that hate because of ethnicity? It is so enlightening to see who Hillary is proud to be endorsed by.

But, in the final analysis, Hillary will never quit because her ego and personal arrogance will not allow it. I would welcome a female President. I don't think that gender makes much difference, but NOT Hillary. I mean when you are $20 MILLION plus in the hole, maybe it's time to get out?

Oh, and that Obama-Clinton dream ticket , as some have called it, will never happen. How can you be President with a Vice president who will undermine you at every turn and seek to overshadow you? A good VP is in the background, Hillary will never do that, she's way to arrogant.

some people say that they are tired of the way bush is running this country. and i am in total aggrement. i also am tired of this. but to say that you will never vote for a balck man and would rather vote for macain, and continue to live the way you have been for the past 8 years is just dumb-founding. i mean hello, can we wake up and see a brighter day here.

What is happening in this primary election process is amazing! If you plan on voting for Hillary Clinton you are a feminist, racist and are ridiculed by the media and political hiarchy, and to hear the pundits speak, ruining the democratic party. Since when is a vote for a person who has the right credentials wrong for the party. My vote and the vote of hundreds of thousands of women and men across this country is being minimalized by those who have a different opinion and are being allowed to push their platform through the media, that has been biased toward Obama from the start. Of course, the media laughs at the idea that they have been biased, in much the same sarcastic and disrespectful way that Barack Obama has spoken of Hillary Clinton. Geraldine Farraro has been criticized for speaking the truth. I haven't heard the press laugh at Obama for his clothes, his laugh or his ideas. I haven't heard Chris Mathews, Keith Oberman, David Shuster or the other Obama supporters ridicule Michele Obama and her religious relationship with Reverend Wright, or, being proud to be an American for the first time, the way they have attacked Bill Clinton from everything to his support for Hillary, to tasteless references concerning Monica Lewinsky, to allowing Chelsea to campaign for her mother, who by the way, has more class than any one of these supposed journalists. This election is very important to me and others across this country who refuse to let the media or DNC decide for us who will be the next president of the United States. And it is the Obama campaign that has played the race card. It seems that the Obama campaign has deemed themselves the only ones that can mention race, anyone else who mentions race is a bigot. How incredulous that the Clintons who have spent their entire lives defending the rights of all oppressed people, now be accused of being racist. Not until recently, has there been any discussion about the sexism that has reared it's ugly head in this race. We constantly hear about how amazing it would be to have the first black male president, but we almost never hear about how amazing it would be to have the first women president. The pundits keep talking about how nasty this election has been. I don't know what planet they live on. This has been the most civil race I have seen in years. Every time a critism was made of Barack the media immediately came to his defense. If Obama criticized Clinton it was a "Good for him" moment. If only the powers that be, could have let this process play out as it should have, without interference, the terrible divide that we are now faced with would not exist. The behavior of some who chose to shortcircut this election has caused voters to dig in their heals and fight until the very end. In 2000 we had the republicans to blame for the outcome. It is so sad to say, in 2008, it is the media, the democratic leaders and the DNC who will ultimately be responsible for the outcome. Once again we have been fooled!

All the democrats have become the Rat Pack, they have their own little Sammy Davis and Angie Dickenson in Obama and Hillary. The elite of America a rich black man fighting for the leadership of party made up of socialist snobs.When the guy who dragged half of them super delegates into office on his coattails and was known as the first Black President is looked on as a traitor because he recognizes the hypocracy of the masses. None of this bunch would have nothing to do with a poor black or a poor woman but have the arrogance to ask for their vote

It's funny, watching the news, listening to them try to make the decision for us, dictating tat Hillary should leave as "pledged delegates" are voting Osama...

The fact is, there's no nominee till the DNC. PERIOD. Regardless of what the damned media wannabe king makers say, think or believe, what voters say or Osama says, there is no nominee yet and I hope Hillary stays in till the convention is over.

Something to remember is that this would NOT be the first time, far from it, that a nominee didn't have the popular vote. Also, delegates can vote basically any way they want to and there's nothing anyone can do about it. It's not so much who has the most votes in these party elections, it's the candidates ELECTABILITY/ Hillary has the electability.

Another thing to keep in mind is Michigan and Florida. MANY in both states have stated that if they aren't seated at the DNC then they will feel obliged to vote McCain in November. The Democratic leadership knows they stand a very good chance of losing a Democratic win in these two states if they dont accept the votes from there. Hillary won these two states, Osama knows it and so does the party.

I turned 45 this March. I have voted in every election I was able to since I was old enough to vote and without exception I have always voted Democrat. Now I am registered Independent. Come November, if I can't vote Hillary Clinton then I WILL vote John McCain regardless of what anyone says or thinks. If the Democratic Party wants my vote then they had better nominate Hillary.

Dan, have you any idea how insulting it is to say that only white guilt could explain votes for Obama?

And you wonder why people cry foul. Is it "male guilt" for all the years of misogny that gets HC your vote?

You are all rationale and practical thinking. Everyone else is a reactionary idiot, eh?

A guilty white liberal might vote for Obama because they think a viable black candidate for president is long overdue.

But a guilty white liberal might vote for HC because they think a woman has as much right to president as any man.

What the hell is the difference?

You people act like the only voters that count are the ones in Kentucky, West Virgina, et.al. What about all of the voters in the states that Obama won? I'm sick of hearing Clintonistas say that he can't win the white vote. Excuse me, but does a state get much whiter than Iowa? This is just another example of the divisions that Clinton is happy to exploit (along with her statement that she represents "hard-working" voters, as if the only hard working voters are white, old women or those whites that can't make more than $50,000 a year). We need unity and she has shown time and again that she is not the one to bring it. Personally, Bill being so close to George HW Bush gave me pause.

dee holson

hillary isn't going anywhere. if she does. her supporters are going with her.

bye bye bama

There's no doubt that Hillary is good at getting the old George Wallace vote which usually goes Republican in the general election. And as for the white male vote -- which Hillary captured so overwhemingly in Kentucky and West Virginia -- a majority of those guys haven't voted Democratic in a presidential election since 1964. That saying "politics makes for strange bedfellows" makes sense to me now.
Sterling Greenwood
Aspen Free Press

patriot - that's real sick. like most obamabots. no interest in voting for someone you would vote for. sick puppy hanging from the obama teat.

ick ewww

Its sad that liberal left chose this all important year to push a newc