Vote for McBama

« Return to Article

Discuss

Member Comments

  • Posted By: Rametyn @ 06/11/2008 1:21:04 PM

    Joe_Mama

    You know what else condradicts EVERYTHING equal rights stands for--voting for someone BECAUSE of the color of their skin and not the content of their character.

    Funny how in the African American demographic of voters, Obama carries 90% of the margin in his favor. While in every other demographic (hispanic, blue collar, white collar, women) there are more equal averages of those who think he is the right person, as those who do not--based more largely in part because of values, interests, and issues that go beyond racial representation.

    What the African American votes seems to reflect is that, whether or not he is the right candidate for the job or not, it is enough that they vote for him just so that history can be made for one particular grouping --cut from the whole of our population.

    I find it odd that the same group of people, who have argued for decades that we SHOULD NOT make choices based soley upon the color of someone else's skin tone, seem to be the same people doing that very thing.

    Where can we find the hypocrosy in that?

    • Posted By: Jack999 @ 06/11/2008 1:29:19 PM

      Exactly,We wait till when the Africa-American President have same Percentage of Black demographic.meaning...Since Independent,they have NONE black Candidate,We only have White candidate all the Along.We had 43 White President all the long 65 % White American pollulation.If when we had already had 6 Black President to date...The Next Election the Trend going to be Same....I SUPPORT your Argument 100% they are racist......Fair?

      • Posted By: SPORTLOCK09 @ 06/11/2008 2:06:00 PM

        Try hooked on phonics. Then we can understand what you are saying.

        • Posted By: Stlmovoter @ 06/11/2008 5:12:44 PM

          My guess is there is a non-native english speaker here. Your sensitivity shines through again SPORTLOCK. It's not that hard to figure out what Jack999 said., if you are willing to try to listen. America has had 100% white presidents: all 43 of them. White population of the United States is, according to Jack999 65%, thus he would like 35% of presidents to have been non-caucasian. And since Blacks are 15% of the population, they should have held the presidency at least 6 times. Whether this is a good argument, you can decide, but it isn't that hard to figure out.

    • Posted By: Stlmovoter @ 06/11/2008 1:28:58 PM

      In the abstract I can see your point, but if there had never been a candidate who was from my demographic group in 219 years, I could see there being a bit of enthusiasm. The African American or Black vote isn't always in lockstep. Until former President Clinton inserted his foot in his mouth several times regarding race there were a lot more Blacks voting for Sen. Clinton. I don't think President Clinton is a racist, but I do think he was doing what he felt necessary to get his wife the best shot at the nomination.

      • Posted By: News and Notes @ 06/11/2008 4:10:10 PM

        Until Obama won Iowa and slimed President Clinton you mean

        • Posted By: Stlmovoter @ 06/11/2008 5:05:44 PM

          Read what I said in comments below here.

      • Posted By: chindognyc @ 06/11/2008 1:32:36 PM

        I agree with you Stlmovoter. At what cost though. He is now viewed as a person who used the race card to get his wife elected. His office is in Harlem. How will he be viewed. Will the blacks understand that it was nothing but politics?

        • Posted By: Stlmovoter @ 06/11/2008 1:49:50 PM

          I agree Bill Clinton has some answering to do, that things he said were destructive and inappropriate. I also notice some things said by assorted people regarding Sen. Clinton. I am a man so I probably missed all but the most blatant zings. It is difficult to sort out because I know a lot of people are just repelled by actions of both Clintons as well. Is hard to tease out what is sexism and what is just dislike of a person becaus eof the actions of the person.

        • Posted By: Stlmovoter @ 06/11/2008 1:36:26 PM

          I am attempting a bit of fence mending here -- because there are a lot of women who felt they were dissed by some of the treatment of Sen. Clinton.

      • Posted By: Stlmovoter @ 06/11/2008 1:34:14 PM

        Similarly I understand why so many women were enthused about Sen. Clinton's campaign. It isn't just latching onto someone because of skin color or gender, but latching onto the first person who has been given a good shot at the job and someone who has reasonable credentials for the job. I understand women thinking there were also a lot of sexist comments regarding Sen. Clinton's campaign.

    • Posted By: chindognyc @ 06/11/2008 1:29:39 PM

      Your really sad Rametyn. For years african-americans have been voting for white politicians. Years. For the first time there is a black man who they feel can run this country well and you white people start to say where is the hypocrosy. You gotta be kidding me. This is just like the book Mein Kompf. Hitler was at least proud of America. Not for there great acheivements, but for their hatred for blacks. He was proud of white americans showing there anger towards blacks. Listen to you. You sound just like that kind of person. Blacks only make up 15% of the U.S. population. Give me a break. Obama talks about getting rid of Affirmative Action. I hope he doesn't. I can tell if a black man tried to get a job and you were the boss, he would be back looking in the classified section.

      • Posted By: SPORTLOCK09 @ 06/11/2008 2:04:35 PM

        I'm sorry but If you don't vote for Obama, it does not mean it's because of his race. Could it be because of his lack of experience he ADMITTED to when elected into the senate? Would I be wasting my time to point out 100 other reasons why he is not ready for the job? I feel you have already heard them all several times over and completely disregard anything but race as the predominent factor. Your like the old saying about trust in relationships. If your spouse is cheating, they will accuse you of doing the same for no reason. So I guess your one of the 13% who needed to know if Barack was black enough for his vote. Your the racist accusing others of being racist just hoping for some white guilt. Try again, I am white, not voting for Obama, and am NOT a racist. Let the race card go, may the better of the 2 candidates prevail.

        • Posted By: Kboogie @ 06/11/2008 4:28:07 PM

          I agree, "LET THE RACE CARD GO, STOP MENTIONING IT IN EVERYONE OF YOUR POSTS"!!

        • Posted By: Jack999 @ 06/11/2008 2:15:50 PM

          You are One in Millions what you said......no Big difference

      • Posted By: News and Notes @ 06/11/2008 4:09:08 PM

        If I were a better qualified 60 year old woman applying for a job, and upper management pushed through an underqualified 47 year old black man, I'd be livid

      • Posted By: ssbn777 @ 06/11/2008 1:43:59 PM

        We need to stop talking about voting against or (yes) FOR a person because of their race, and perhaps start talking about voting for them based on what they stand for. Every time a black person says something along the lines of "We deserve this or that based upon past this or that," many white people (and hispanics and asians) hear that as an excuse and a perpetual sense of entitlement. Saying we should vote for the black guy, because blacks have voted for past white guys is ridiculous! We need to stop voting against or for the guy becuase of his color, and start voting for or against the guy because of his stands on issues and past voting record. I dare you to tell me that statement is racist!!!!!

    • Posted By: joe_mama @ 06/11/2008 3:09:38 PM

      Odd...

      in 1984, Jesse Jackson only got 77% of the African American vote. He didn't jump into the 90s until 1988, AFTER he

      proved that he could actually run a campaign (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?

      res=940DEFD9173AF930A25755C0A96E948260)


      Also odd....

      in 1972 Shirley Chisholm received a little over 430,000 votes in the democratic primaries

      (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Party_%28United_States%29_presidential_primaries%2C_1972). There were

      over 7,000,000 total African American voters (http://www.eac.gov/clearinghouse/docs/voter-registration-and-turnout-in-

      federal-elections-by-race_ethnicity-1972.pdf/attachment_download/file), which means, assuming EVERY one of her votes

      were African American, she only recieved on 6% of the African American vote.

      Even more odd...

      In 1996, Alan Keyes received just over 471,000 votes (http://www.ourcampaigns.com/RaceDetail.html?RaceID=13494), yet

      there were nearly 22,000,000 registered African American voters (http://www.census.gov/population/socdemo/voting/tabA-

      1.xls, http://allcountries.org/uscensus/10_resident_population_selected_characteristics_and_projections.html). Assuming (as

      you must) that all his support was from African Americans, he received barely 2% of the African American vote.

      In 2000, competing such notable African Americans as Al Gore and Bill Bradley, Keyes did much better, he got nearly 1

      million votes (http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/national.php?year=2000&off=0&elect=2&f=0), or 4% of registered

      African American votes (http://www.census.gov/population/socdemo/voting/tabA-1.xls,

      http://allcountries.org/uscensus/10_resident_population_selected_characteristics_and_projections.html).

      Why didn't African Americans support Keyes? They didn't agree with his policies.

      (to be continued....)

      • Posted By: joe_mama @ 06/11/2008 3:12:05 PM

        (....continued from above)
        And the oddest of them all....

        Keyes is a Republican, and we all know how much African Americans support Republicans, so let's take a look at Al

        Sharpton...

        ...I'm sorry, I love a good joke(LOL!).

        But seriously, running against respected African Americans like John Kerry, John Edwards, Howard Dean, and Dennis Kucinich (among others), all the African American candidates--Al Sharpton, Carol

        Moseley Braun, Mildred Glover (who?), Arthur H. Jackson Jr. (ibid), and Willie Felix Carter (there may have been others, but

        I couldn't find their pictures!)--combined for 483, 711 votes in the 2004 Democratic Primaries

        (http://www.ourcampaigns.com/RaceDetail.html?RaceID=1689). This represents less than 1% of all registered African Americans. (http://www.census.gov/population/socdemo/voting/tabA-1.xls,

        http://allcountries.org/uscensus/10_resident_population_selected_characteristics_and_projections.html)


        So I ask you: could it be the African Americans support African American candidates when they AGREE with their policies...or are we just blindly loyal to skin?

        Since you already know the answer, I'll kindly tell you to stfu unless you have something legitimate to say.

        PS--and you better be able to support it with facts, and not just ignorance.

  • Posted By: chindognyc @ 06/11/2008 4:42:59 PM

    Welcome Hillary Supporters June 11th, 2008 12:55 pm ET

    I'd like to welcome all the Hillary Clinton supporters to the republican party and thank you for coming to your senses and backing the best candidate, John McCain.

    Together we can:

    1) help reverse Roe v. Wade and make abortion illegal - let's stop the murder of unborn babies!

    2) stop gays from getting married - let's get a constitutional amendment to stop gay marriage and let them know they are not normal!

    3) keep fighting the good fight in Iraq for as long as it takes - remember 9/11 and what we are fighting for!

    4) get ready to invade Iran - we know they are planning to nuke us - let's get them first! McCain will make sure we do!

    Good to see democrats finally waking up and becoming more conservative!

    Look at what the Republicans are saying. Is this what the Hillary supporters want?

    • Posted By: spjon @ 06/11/2008 5:08:14 PM

      This is the third article I've seen you make this exact same post under.

      1) Roe V. Wade was/is a Supreme Court decision. The Court is plenty conservative enough right now to overturn it if they felt they should. But you'll notice they aren't taking any cases on this issue.

      2) I don't agree with gay marriage but I also don't agree with marriage in general. They should all be called Civil Unions or Domestic Partnerships, your church (I'm assuming either you go to one or you're a hypocrite) can call it whatever it likes. It is, however, not the business of the government to tell two people they can or cannot commit themselves to each other and that they should not have equal protections under the law. Whether they are normal or not is debatable, but I'll bet you (and I) have a few character quirks that would make us not seem normal.

      4) Invade Iran? Crazy. No reason to. I'm worried about them too, but it's a bit early to be rushing to war.

      Last but not least, you are not going to be getting many Hillary supporters. They are already starting to turn to Obama and most of the people who post on these kind of sites are just Republicans faking to be Democrats trying to sway the weak minded.

    • Posted By: News and Notes @ 06/11/2008 4:48:12 PM

      No, but Obama, his surrogates, and his supporters need to make more effort to reach out to Hillary supporters, who are generally more moderate

      • Posted By: chindognyc @ 06/11/2008 4:51:40 PM

        How can you when you have Hillary Supporters like Harriet Christian who saiy that she fought for civil rights yet she uses racial slurs on youtube and on FoxNews. Plea;se explain that to me.

        • Posted By: News and Notes @ 06/11/2008 5:03:10 PM

          One supporter out of 18,000,000 is hardly a movement

  • Posted By: danjones @ 06/11/2008 4:42:02 PM

    America's atonement for slavery? Are you kidding me? I'm so sick of this kind of white-liberal guilt-laden nonsense.... seriously, there's not a single white person (or any person) living in America today who owned a slave. The majority of us aren't even descendents of slave owners as America's great immigration came mostly after the Civil War. Holding today's "Americans" or "whites" as responsible for slavery and in need of some kind of atonement is the worst kind of racist generalization.... you're all white, so you're all guilty, whether or not you had anything to do with it. Makes me feel ill.

    • Posted By: chindognyc @ 06/11/2008 4:44:47 PM

      You forget though, there are white people who fought so that blacks could not vote or sit with whites on the bus or eat at a restaraunt. They live in Kentucky, West Virginia, Ohio, Pennsylvania and many Southern States. They are still living with us and they still vote and they still hate danjones. Your right about the slavery, but remember that Hitler even said he was proud of America for their hatred towards blacks. This came out of Hitlers mouth.

      • Posted By: SPORTLOCK09 @ 06/11/2008 4:55:23 PM

        25000 whites died in 24 hrs in one battle alone fighting for the north in the cival war. No mention of their sacrifice for the freedoms of blacks? Dont care much about them whiteys do ya?

        • Posted By: Kboogie @ 06/11/2008 5:04:39 PM

          I love them whiteys!! Wait weren't you the guy who said "let race go"? Stop mentioning it in every one of your posts. You reference race more than anyone here.

          Oh yeah, love them Civil War heroes!!!!

        • Posted By: chindognyc @ 06/11/2008 4:59:24 PM

          They weren't fighting to save blacks from slavery. They were fighting because the south wanted to be seperate from the North. That is what started the war and the two flags. Get your facts straight.

      • Posted By: News and Notes @ 06/11/2008 4:50:08 PM

        It's 2008. There are still racial problems, but there has been tremendous racial strides. This discussion is fatiguing because hardly anyone cares about Obama being black. Some people think he is underqualified

        • Posted By: chindognyc @ 06/11/2008 4:57:44 PM

          and we should judge Hillary for her big scandal when she stole 5 million for her Senate run. You don't want us to say that she would just get into the White House to use her power to make herself more rich.

  • Posted By: nohobohos1 @ 06/11/2008 4:33:27 PM


    BS article....Obama breaks down positions on all issues on his site. Example: check out his proposed reforms that need to be done with the credit industry....
    Plus, in defense of both candidates, being President not a one man show. They will appoint committees to handle and revise as needed any plans. The most any candidate in any election can give constituents is the way they will lean toward solving problems and point towards what their priorities and focus will be. With Bush still running around crazy, no telling what will else will need to be undone by '09 anyway.

    • Posted By: SPORTLOCK09 @ 06/11/2008 4:59:34 PM

      Beauty of posting your positions on a website.......

      Can claim your aides posted your stands by error like his mis-votes
      Nobody can question how you can implement any of your stands on a website
      Isn't refer to my website for my views a beautiful thing?

  • Posted By: Rametyn @ 06/11/2008 3:51:43 PM

    How long is the McSame-McBush argument going to cycle before people who do "actually" pay attention realize that Mcain has never been anything like Bush. That he has voted more moderate, and more centrist, on many issues--a lot of which were in direct opposition to Bush.

    Just curious where that argument comes from, or for how long it will run through the gammit before people (Dems) realize it has no merit.

    • Posted By: Kboogie @ 06/11/2008 4:11:32 PM

      Because, regardless of how he voted in his "maverick days", over the past 2 years, McC's voting record has mirrored Bush's. Not to mention, he's continuing the same policies that Bush has backed during his last term. That sounds like the SAME to me. If you look at the Bush policies, and then run down McCain's campaign platform, they look like twins. Check it out, and get back to me..........

      • Posted By: News and Notes @ 06/11/2008 4:53:55 PM

        McCain's shifting of positions to appease the radicals on the right has been disappointing

  • Posted By: Rametyn @ 06/11/2008 4:35:02 PM

    Wow, anyone watching Cavuto right now.

    If all these Hillary supporters keep pledging their support for Mcain, then the Obama numbers won't matter anyway. Karol Hutchins, a Clinton staff memeber just said she could not support a candidate less qualified than Hillary; and that she would support a Mcain-Clinton ticket before she even would an Obama-Clinton ticket.

    Hmmm.

    How many votes did Hill get--over 17 million?

    That's a lot of votes for Mcsame.

    LOL

    • Posted By: Richard1327 @ 06/11/2008 4:44:47 PM

      The electoral numbers and demographcs do not support Obama no matter how you look at it. Hillary's supporters have more in common with McCain.

  • Posted By: danjones @ 06/11/2008 4:42:21 PM

    America's atonement for slavery? Are you kidding me? I'm so sick of this kind of white-liberal guilt-laden nonsense.... seriously, there's not a single white person (or any person) living in America today who owned a slave. The majority of us aren't even descendents of slave owners as America's great immigration came mostly after the Civil War. Holding today's "Americans" or "whites" as responsible for slavery and in need of some kind of atonement is the worst kind of racist generalization.... you're all white, so you're all guilty, whether or not you had anything to do with it. Makes me feel ill.

  • Posted By: Rametyn @ 06/11/2008 4:41:10 PM

    Nohob: Just stating the obvious.

    Saying that the presidency is NOT a one man show, while stating that Bush is still running around crazy is kind of a contradiction

  • Posted By: Rametyn @ 06/11/2008 4:18:00 PM

    I have--and I think you need to research more.

    The only things that have changed in the past two years is his stance in immigration, and making the tax cuts permanent.

    You are going to try and equate "MCSAME" because of two issues that can be held up against a miriad of centrist votes that span two decades of moderate Republican view points.

    You need to call up John Kerry, and ask him why he wanted to get Mcain on his ticket as VP if he was so much like Bush. Then get back to me.

    Kind of stupid to run against someone, then ask someone else just like him to be your Vice Pres.

    Alot of Dems in congress don't even share your viewpoint--nor do a lot of Repubs for that matter.

    • Posted By: Stlmovoter @ 06/11/2008 4:26:07 PM

      You are correct he was more appealing to Democrats four years ago.. I don't know whether Kerry wanted him as VP or not. Assuming he did, the shift in the two positions you mention, as well as his being in strong agreement now with Bush about the continuation of the Iraq war make him a lot less appealing to Democrats than he was then. He seems to have shifted majorly in positions in order to secure the nomination, thus he is not now saying the moderate things he used to. And he cannot do the moderate things he used to talk about because he has now sold himself with the right wing of the party.

  • Posted By: JG Georgia @ 06/11/2008 3:35:05 PM

    Obama may be untested and maybe he is liberal, but anything is better than McSame. Voters need to clean out the house and the senate and if the new ones don't feliver, recall them or impeach them. But start paying attention to something other than American Idol.

    • Posted By: SPORTLOCK09 @ 06/11/2008 3:38:16 PM

      Lets see. If you dont vote for the black candidate you are a racist. Now you would like us to believe that you can impeach the first black president witout being called a racist. VERY VERY laughable.

      • Posted By: Kboogie @ 06/11/2008 4:22:04 PM

        No one said ALL Obama detractors are racist. Stop listening to the big, bad media.

  • Posted By: Rametyn @ 06/11/2008 4:09:54 PM

    Last night Mort Condrackey was talking about this very thing. Although, I hate to admit it, there will be a vast difference in the numbers of "open" polls and those of private voting. Mcain is not slipping as much as people might believe--because when asked in open polls no one will admit to voting along racially divided lines. However, when the actual vote does come, in the privacy of the booth, those divided undertones will re-emerge for many and go against Obama more vastly than the polls can reflect now.

    Not a way I would want to win the election. But that just shows you what the polls know.

    • Posted By: Stlmovoter @ 06/11/2008 4:16:52 PM

      For once here I cannot cite an exact source, but when I was watching MSNBC one of the panelists said the polling companies had started factoring in what they were being told to their faces vs what actual voting results were. Not sure that means the current polls are accurate, but there is a bit of a curve being put in to compensate for the skew you are talking about. Will try to find documentation on this and come back with it.

  • Posted By: chindognyc @ 06/11/2008 12:58:48 PM

    Scroll down and just look at the chart and you tell me who would be right for the small people. Obama or McCain.

    • Posted By: News and Notes @ 06/11/2008 4:12:57 PM

      Hillary

    • Posted By: amendment2man @ 06/11/2008 1:17:05 PM

      you assume that the tax rates will remain constant? how will more spending (Obama's omnly choice for a short term fix) affect your chart?

      • Posted By: chindognyc @ 06/11/2008 1:33:34 PM

        Lets see what his plan will be at the end of these two weeks. Bush said the same thing about tax and spend. Where are we now?

  • Posted By: chindognyc @ 06/11/2008 12:44:27 PM

    It is not easy to fix all of our domestic problems and especially since our President didn't help invest in our Country. I think Obama will do his best to try and fix all and if not most of our problems. He will also try and fix our hatred between one another (blacks and whites), since we are going around and telling other countries to treat there people with respect. By showing those numbers below, it shows who McCain will be looking out for. The middle will become the poor and you will see a failing economy. I really want people to look at the chart below and you tell me if you want to hold your anger towards Obama because a woman didn't become the choice, that you will vote for McCain. Especially since we know that he will work hard to get rid of Roe v Wade.

    • Posted By: SPORTLOCK09 @ 06/11/2008 2:19:53 PM

      Heres some good reasons for Obama not to be president.

      From Dreams of My Father: 'I ceased to advertise my
      mother's race at the age of 12 or 13, when I began to
      suspect that by doing so I was ingratiating myself to
      whites.'

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

      From Dreams of My Father: 'There was something about
      him that made me wary, a little too sure of himself,
      maybe. And white.'

      From Dreams of My Father: 'It remained necessary to
      prove which side you were on, to show your loyalty to
      the black masses, to strike out and name names.'

      From Dreams of My Father: 'I never emulate white men
      and brown men whose fates didn't speak to my own. It
      was into my father's image, the black man, son of
      Africa, that I'd packed all the attributes I sought
      in myself, the attributes of Martin and Malcolm,
      DuBois and Mandela.'

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

      As a president, should you hold such animosity towards the white race being it does still represent the majority of the working class whom pays the majority of the taxes?

      • Posted By: Stlmovoter @ 06/11/2008 4:10:10 PM

        I will post here what someone else noted above about this:

        The main argument I have for this is your last statement. He will stand with the MUSLIMS, as you deemed necessary to shout, is taken so far out of context when it is placed by itself that it's almost laughable.

        If you read the entire book, you'd know that he, at length, describing the situation in post 9/11, when American CITIZENS who happen to be Muslims were being wrongly treated over an ignorant fear by people who did not know anything about them. The President of the United States of AMERICA must defend AMERICANS not just CHRISTIANS and not just WHITES. Obama stated that, if people ignorantly decided to oppress the Muslims simply for their religious preference, he would stand against this oppression. What's wrong with that?

  • Posted By: Richard1327 @ 06/11/2008 2:02:45 PM

    Hillary Clinton had a pretty good domestic policy ready to go on day one. Is it too late to make a nominee exchange? Why are we considering these two men for president if they don't have a sound domestic policy, especially in these times of economic crisis. Someone has to clean up after the Bushes again and it will take another Clinton to do it. Aren't we electing the president of the United States in November - one would think that the candidate must have DOMESTIC POLICY EXPERIENCE and actually be concerned with domestic issues?

    • Posted By: News and Notes @ 06/11/2008 4:05:49 PM

      Hillary would have been the best nominee, but the elites pushed Obama through because the DNC always wants what is new and exciting, no matter how incompetent. They cast aside the loyal blue collar democrats

    • Posted By: Jack999 @ 06/11/2008 2:13:53 PM

      You got to ask John McCain and his REPUBLICAN,they are the One Impreached Bill Clinton,for a Woman reasons,that goes with John Mccain he had an affairs with his scandal yet he leads the dog pack to impreached bill clinton out of Office,thats how we get Bush,same old of woman story.

  • Posted By: Jack999 @ 06/11/2008 2:04:03 PM

    Here is my 18 cents. This country was built on a racial divide, so it continues to nurse this wound but "We The People" fail to take the real medicine and allow this wound to heal correctly. To my White American brothers and sisters, Blacks have been working, fighting, suffering and building this country along side you since this country was founded. Regardless of slavery, jim crow, segregation and other forms of government sponsored disenfranchisement they have continued to fight and struggle for a place at the table to make a difference and receive the benefits of being an American. They have struggled to take part in the American Dream even when this counrty did not want them participating. The fact that they have not went to some form of radical homegrown terrorist movement is a testament to that groups Patriotism and committment to seeing a better America.
    To my Black American brothers and sisters, Whites have suffered and experienced disenfranchement at the hands of bad government policy , deteriorating education system and lack of quality job opportunities along side you as well. Regardless of priveleges they may have directly or indirectly received they have still had to expend blue, sweat and tears to pursue the America Dream.
    "We The People" need to stop allowing ourselves to be subdivided into these ethnic and class based tribes that make us lose focus of what makes us common. Until we can stop seeing what makes us different and starting embracing what makes us common "One Nation, under God, indivisible with Liberty and Justice for All" we will fall short of the ideas set forth by our founding fathers.
    We are American, not Democrats
    We are Americans, not Republicans
    We are Americans, not black people
    We are Americans, not white people
    Someone is trying to conquer this country. United we Stand, Divided we Fall.
    Our divisions allow for this conquest to continue.
    Candidates MUST applying and practice the direction to US Constitutions Values of the Our forefathers.....that's, no exceptions.

    • Posted By: Richard1327 @ 06/11/2008 2:13:56 PM

      We should get rid of all political parties and elect the best person for the job. No one will ever completely eradicate human discrimination/pre-judging because it is part of the human species and survival depends on being able to pick out other humans that are different from you that may cause danger. All of this doesn't change the fact that Obama is not the best person to be our next president no matter what color he is. I can't believe that from all of the senators, governors and representatives in the Democratic Party, all they could come up with is a law professor with 2 years in the senate voting "present" because he cpuldn't make a decision.

      • Posted By: Jack999 @ 06/11/2008 2:50:31 PM

        You have two choices for president:

        The first one has one of the longest lines of political experience in history. He is exceedingly popular in congress. He also volunteered to defend the our country in the US Navy.

        The second one has no real political experience outside of Illinois. He is tall and lanky with big ears. He even lost a few of his first attempts at gaining political office. He is an excellent speechwriter and orator. He is a good attorney and has a successful law practice.

        So which one would you choose?

        This is a trick question because both were already Presidents of the United States. The first one is the 15th President of the United States, James Buchannan. He is the President who mired us in the Civil War by declaring the action illegal but doing nothing when the south decided to seceed from the Union. He is largely considered by historians as being the worst President in American history.

        He was followed by the other man who became the 16th President of the United States: This man is credited with the end of slavery, the end of the Civil War, and unification of the nation. He became president at a dark time when our country was deeply divided over very polarizing issues. He had no experience in Washington prior to his Presidency. His name was Abraham Lincoln and he is widely considered by historians as one of the best Presidents in American History.

        Sound familiar?

        • Posted By: News and Notes @ 06/11/2008 4:03:26 PM

          This is 2008, not 1860. You cannot compare Obama to Lincoln, FDR, JFK, RFK, or MLK. He is a smooth talking oppotunist radical politician

        • Posted By: SPORTLOCK09 @ 06/11/2008 3:24:38 PM

          Jack999
          Our first 25 president s wouldnt make it in office for 15 seconds today. Could you imagine if one of our best JFK has the media in his face as current presidents do today? You think the country would be so warm to Marilyn Monroe singing happy birthday mr president ? JFK was a known playboy, think that would fly? The cival war you mentioned, 25,000 deaths in a 24 hr period, one battle. How long do you think he would be in office? Lincoln wanted to send the slaves back to Africa after the civil war. Think that flys today? Vietnam, how many died? Did we as a country even know why we were there? NOPE think that would fly? Times have changed a bit, ya think?

      • Posted By: News and Notes @ 06/11/2008 4:01:40 PM

        He wasnt a professor, he was only a lecturer.

      • Posted By: SPORTLOCK09 @ 06/11/2008 3:13:28 PM

        Bravo!!! The Only way to implement unity would be to tear down the parties that devide us. We want unity but still have segregation in our congress/senate. One big independant party would reflect independant thoughts by each senator or congressman and would not reflect the ideas of any specific party but the specific views of the individual. Its the only way as far as I can tell from the cheap seats.

  • Posted By: RDawson @ 06/11/2008 4:00:52 PM

    "Change Politics" on both sides seem, to me, to be the Same Politics we always get. Make a claim, give a promise, tell the electorate (what they want to hear) a lie, get elected, don't produce. I would like to believe that what Obama's slogan claims is true "real change that you can believe in", however, if past behavior is the measure of future behavior - i highly doubt it.

  • Posted By: Stlmovoter @ 06/11/2008 12:59:41 PM

    I don't see where Samuelson can claim McCain has such fierce convictions, as he dumped his positions on illegal immigration and on Bush's tax cuts. Obama is indeed stating some things that are internally inconsistent, but McCain has jettisoned positions on which he had been consistent for years in order to embrace positions which are inconsistent with his previous positions and are inconsistent in themselves.

    • Posted By: chindognyc @ 06/11/2008 1:02:58 PM

      I think Obama is only going with how the economy is going. I did a chart below that I got from CNN and it makes so much sense why the rich are so against Obama winning. Take a look.

      • Posted By: Stlmovoter @ 06/11/2008 1:13:04 PM

        Oh, I am definitely an Obama voter, just not blind to imperfections. We vote for the best choice, not a perfect choice in any election.

        • Posted By: chindognyc @ 06/11/2008 1:15:54 PM

          You make so much sense and thank you. I know that Obama won't be able to fix everything. If our politicians could, we would live in a perfect society. But I do think that we will be better off then if McCain is our President.

          • Posted By: SPORTLOCK09 @ 06/11/2008 2:15:15 PM

            One question........
            WHY?

            • Posted By: Stlmovoter @ 06/11/2008 2:51:08 PM

              Well, for one thing, McCain thinks the people who were duped into subprime mortgages should just fend for themselves, unlike Obama. Also, at least chindognyc didn't post a bunch of quotes out of context to smear someone like you did to Obama. Knowing the context of the quote about standing with the muslims makes clear your use of that quote against him was very offensive.

              • Posted By: SPORTLOCK09 @ 06/11/2008 3:35:32 PM

                Duped? First of all, the mortgage companies knew they couldnt afford these loans in the first place. During the refi boom as a loan officer all we heard was blacks and minorities were being excluded from the American dream of homeownership because they were not being approved for home loans. Then the mortgage companies lowered the bar so these people could obtain housing and now its they were duped into making bad decisions and those of us who considered what they could afford before selecting their home(thats right, the mortgage co's did NOT select their homes) has to bail these people out who should not have been able to obtain financing in the first place if they did lower the bar in fear of being called a racist lender. Make a choice, stand by it for a change. Dont blame everyone else for your bad decisions and wait for the government to take my tax dollars to bail you out.

                • Posted By: Stlmovoter @ 06/11/2008 3:52:07 PM

                  Yes, duped. Watch Dan Immergluck's video about the subprime mortgage crisis. He is an expert in the field, as the site will show you. It is kinda dry and kinda long, but well worth watching.
                  http://smartech.gatech.edu/handle/1853/20278

                  • Posted By: Stlmovoter @ 06/11/2008 3:55:59 PM

                    I'll see if they let this appear as a link or not.

                    http://smartech.gatech.edu/handle/1853/20278

                    • Posted By: Stlmovoter @ 06/11/2008 4:00:44 PM

                      Unlike someone else I can give the complete source for my claim. There is a lot of just description of how the mortgage lending process used to work and how it changed in order to create the subprime mortgage crisis, but in the midst of it he makes clear that subprime mortgages had to be SOLD, they weren't just bought. His meaning here is clear.

      • Posted By: willnotvoteobama @ 06/11/2008 1:18:53 PM

        How destructive to the U.S. economy would a Barack Obama presidency be?

        An exclusive Newsmax analysis warns: There could be a very rough time ahead.

        Beneath Obama's flowery rhetoric lies a dangerous economic plan that will wreak havoc on the American economy.

        Obama plans to return to the failed policies of high taxation coupled with an expansion of government spending.

        Worse, Obama says he is absolutely committed to almost doubling the capital gains rate ??? something he will easily accomplish with a Democrat Congress.

        In the coming months ??? when investors realize that Obama will raise the cap gains rate ??? there could be a stampede of asset sales as investors rush to take their profits now to avoid Obama's doubling of the tax rates next year.

        All of these issues and more are explored in Newsmax magazine's special report "Obamanomics ??? the Coming Tax-and-Spend Nightmare," by Wall Street Journal columnist John Fund.

        This Newsmax magazine special report gives Americans the first in-depth look at the Democratic presidential candidate's likely strategies ??? and how they will affect not just the larger economy, but your personal wealth as well.

        Indeed, Obama makes no bones about his plans to go on a tax rampage. Not only would he increase the capital-gains tax rate from 15 percent to as much as 28 percent, he wants to allow the 2001 and 2003 Bush tax cuts to expire in 2010, which effectively raises taxes on Americans by tens of billions of dollars.

        He also wants to do away with the $102,000 FICA payroll tax cap, which means anyone making over $102,000 would pay an additional 7 percent in taxes on earned income.

        And the loan dividend tax rate George Bush implemented? Under President Obama it will be DOA!

        • Posted By: Stlmovoter @ 06/11/2008 3:23:13 PM

          Um... His tax plan calls for lower taxes for everyone but the top 5% of income earners. I would hardly call that crazed taxation. Also, he makes specific exceptions for small businesses and individuals with regard to capital gains taxes. Again, hardly drooling psychopathic taxation.

      • Posted By: SPORTLOCK09 @ 06/11/2008 2:13:52 PM

        How would you feel about a man who sits in a church for 20 yrs bashing poor black people? Do you embrace him? The country is being torn apart by poor black people. Whites can't succeed because of poor black people. Aids was created by poor black people to kill whitey. And you have the audacity to make a statement like rich whites wont vote for him because of taxes? Could be because of his views of RICH WHITE PEOPLE. Ya think?

  • Posted By: RDawson @ 06/11/2008 3:58:20 PM

    "Change Politics" on both sides seem, to me, to be the Same Politics we always get. Make a claim, give a promise, tell the electorate (what they want to hear) a lie, get elected, don't produce. I would like to believe that what Obama's slogan claims is true "real change that you can believe in", however, if past behavior is the measure of future behavior - i highly doubt it.

  • Posted By: Rametyn @ 06/11/2008 3:37:52 PM

    I think Richard's argument is a little more convincing. The fact that 95% of African Americans voted Obama kind of takes the wind out of your sail. And if your parents were trying to sway you toward their convictions--well, that is an example of learned behavior--much in the same way that people in the south teach their own children to fear black people. But I;m sure you won't admit the similarity.

    One thing is for certain, if your parents are fearful of it happening again, you would think that the last thing they would want is for an almost entire race to vote clearly for a candidate because he is like in "skin tone."
    It is that very behavior that sends up warning bells and aides in ithe llumination of just how prominate racial divisiveness still stirs beneath the guise of civil liberty.

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse