Obama takes North Carolina; Clinton wins Indiana

I find it ludicrous that Obama is being portrayed as having a racist agenda, because his pastor happens to say stupid things. People actually are claiming that Obama, the first serious black contender for president, is somehow going to make this country more racist? The irony is amazing.

I suspect that John McCain's buddies probably said some pretty racist things at some point. Like in that prison camp in Vietnam. I suspect he's just as racist as any other candidate, but alas, the media doesn't have a convenient YouTube video of him to air all over the country.

We've had MANY presidents who had agendas that could be considered racist. Andrew Jackson was an avowed racist. John Quincy Adams supported the Indian Wars Jackson initiated, despite disliking Jackson personally. Andrew Johnson did his best to block passage of Amendments granting blacks citizenship and the right to vote. Chester Arthur signed the Chinese Exclusion Act, and Calvin Coolidge signed the National Origins Act, essentially banning immigration from southern and eastern Europe. Teddy Roosevelt's imperialist attitudes largely the result of his feelings of racial superiority and of taking up "The White Man's Burden". FDR allowed the deportation of Mexican-American citizens during the Depression and signed off on the interning of Japanese Americans during WW2. Eisenhower was at best indifferent on race, refusing to take a stand on integration until forced to do so by the states. Richard Nixon was both a racist and anti-Semitic. LBJ did alot for the Civil Rights movement, but privately referred to blacks in the most vile of terms. Reagan's policies largely excluded blacks from government and rolled back many of the gains made during the civil rights era.

If Obama indeed has some kind of racist agenda, that puts him no worse than some of our most cherished leaders, who each had their own racial hangups. And it probably puts him on the same level with the other candidates as well.

Ridiculous wrote:

You Dems should be hoping Obama wins the nomination. If Hillary wins, I will most definitely vote for ANYONE BUT HER. If Obama wins, I wouldn't be so quick to vote McCain, even if I wasn't thrilled about Obama.
Hillary is doing nothing but trying to further her own self interests. She doesn't care about change or betterment of our country. She just wants to be president any way you slice it. She will even resort to tanking the Democratic nominee this year so that she can run again in '12. Despicable. But what else would one expect from a Clinton?
<quoted text>

I don't see somebody with his voting record (extremely liberal) as being a unifier. I don't see him changing anything, unless by change you mean turning our country into a socialist nation, in which the people become so dependent upon the government for everything that they no longer really have a true voice.

topoff wrote:

I'm very disappointed that Obama is trying to steal the democratic nomination by disallowing the votes of millions of people in both Florida and Michigan.

Wellllll, keep your chin up, because Obama is working towards getting both delegations seated. Oh and by the way, Barack will end the primaries beating Hillary in Popular Vote, Pledged Delegates and Super Delegates, even counting the votes from Florida and Michigan...

Notwithstanding the efforts of the goofy Operation Chaos crowd.

Guess you just hitched your cart to a loser.

Now we can start taking apart the semi-senile octegenarian wife deserting Pac-money eating corporate jet rider and his elitist snotty socialite multi-millionaire former mistress cum current wife.

It's gonna be fun!

Even though I don't particularly agree with his stance on a lot of things, I think he means well and he has the charisma to persuade people to do something different. Yes, he does tend to lean toward a socialist agenda, which I dislike. But I'd rather have him in office than Hillary.

Hmmmmmm wrote:

<quoted text>
I don't see somebody with his voting record (extremely liberal) as being a unifier. I don't see him changing anything, unless by change you mean turning our country into a socialist nation, in which the people become so dependent upon the government for everything that they no longer really have a true voice.

Mo Lubee wrote:

<quoted text>
Wellllll, keep your chin up, because Obama is working towards getting both delegations seated. Oh and by the way, Barack will end the primaries beating Hillary in Popular Vote, Pledged Delegates and Super Delegates, even counting the votes from Florida and Michigan...
Notwithstanding the efforts of the goofy Operation Chaos crowd.
Guess you just hitched your cart to a loser.
Now we can start taking apart the semi-senile octegenarian wife deserting Pac-money eating corporate jet rider and his elitist snotty socialite multi-millionaire former mistress cum current wife.
It's gonna be fun!

So, now the votes in MI and FL only count if they don't hurt him? At least they'll have a voice. As far as the "semi-senile" presidential candidate....why is it that the PC police think it's ok to show ageism? As far as the other comments...glad to see you have an opinion, maybe now you'll use those investigative skills to check out Obama's background.

Ridiculous wrote:

Even though I don't particularly agree with his stance on a lot of things, I think he means well and he has the charisma to persuade people to do something different. Yes, he does tend to lean toward a socialist agenda, which I dislike. But I'd rather have him in office than Hillary.
<quoted text>

I can respect that opinion. It's well thought out, and doesn't drop down to name calling. Although, I think Obama has done more than" lean toward a socialist agenda," he's flat out fallen that way. At least he had the guts to stand up against the rediculous gax tax holiday. I think that may have been more of an appeal to conservative-independent voters though. He doesn't really have to worry about losing his base of voters.

A simple question: Just two choices

Who would you rather have as President of the United States?

1. An ex Vietnam Veteran and POW that defended this Nation? Or,

2. Chelsea Clinton's Mommy?

simple wrote:

A simple question: Just two choices
Who would you rather have as President of the United States?
1. An ex Vietnam Veteran and POW that defended this Nation? Or,
2. Chelsea Clinton's Mommy?

Or

3. A closet racist who has the patriotism of a small appliance light bulb?

simple wrote:

A simple question: Just two choices
Who would you rather have as President of the United States?
1. An ex Vietnam Veteran and POW that defended this Nation? Or,
2. Chelsea Clinton's Mommy?

Just like Osbama, you make no sence at all.

simple wrote:

A simple question: Just two choices
Who would you rather have as President of the United States?
1. An ex Vietnam Veteran and POW that defended this Nation? Or,
2. Chelsea Clinton's Mommy?

I Would vote for America's Iron Lady Hillary Clinton first. She is strong yet different than Bush.

In the second place even though I am not a republican, I find McCain more trustworthy than Osbama. I don’t like facilitating media slaves regardless of race.

I can’t make up whether Osbamas words are his or CNN’s. He is too much hot air so It will either be Hillary or McCain. At least I know where they stand for. And it is not for OSAMA.

Yeah, that gas tax holiday is a joke. Do people really think that if they remove the gas tax of about 18 cents per gallon, that gas companies won't realize that people were paying the full price and then just increase their rates? That wouldn't amount to much more than $50 over the entire summer for most normal people.

Hmmmmmm wrote:

<quoted text>
I can respect that opinion. It's well thought out, and doesn't drop down to name calling. Although, I think Obama has done more than" lean toward a socialist agenda," he's flat out fallen that way. At least he had the guts to stand up against the rediculous gax tax holiday. I think that may have been more of an appeal to conservative-independent voters though. He doesn't really have to worry about losing his base of voters.