PROVE YOU ARE NOT RACIST VOTE FOR OBAMA.

[BZ770 2]

Redeem yourself by not being racist vote for Obama. This is your chance to be a good citizen.

[SouthLink02 8]

In addition, everyone who votes for Obama and gets this t-shirt

http://www.zazzle.com/i_am_not_racist_shir...698184763950599

[AU Mom 0]

How about I prove I'm not a racist by drafting Condoleeza Rice?

[RunInRed 16,492]

These type of posts are beyond worthless and add nothing to the political debate. Barack has never played the race card yet I guarantee his opponents will bring it up. Sigh.

[WarEagle007 1]

uhhh....how about I elect the best leader and someone with a decent mind for international relations. Thanks!

[jw 4 au 526]

OK! Hold on, I am not racist...nevermind. However, I do like his enthusiasm and the way he carries himself (dare I say he's articulate), I just think he is far lacking on experience. Easy to say some of his ideas, just hard to accomplish them once in Washington.

And I am sure he appreciates your grammer-poor signature showing your support of his campaign. (Dare I say again, you sir, are not articulate.)

[TexasTiger 13,029]

Kinda like saying "prove you don't hate former POWs-- vote for McCain!"

[otterinbham 0]

I would have voted for Colin Powell in a heartbeat. Oh, I forgot. One has to take a political litmus test to be considered black.

[TitanTiger 20,511]

Redeem yourself by not being racist vote for Obama. This is your chance to be a good citizen.

If this isn't a joke, I weep for this country's future.

[TexasTiger 13,029]

I would have voted for Colin Powell in a heartbeat. Oh, I forgot. One has to take a political litmus test to be considered black.

No, but one does have to take one to be considered sufficiently Republican for the primary voting base-- Republicans would have NEVER nominated the pro-choice, pro-affirmative action, Colin Powell. Not to mention the fact that he would simply sound too reasonable talking about international relations to have been trusted by Republican primary voters. Condi, too, for that matter.

[TitanTiger 20,511]

Actually, otter has a point. Black candidates get raked over the coals all the time by the old-guard, career s***stirrers like Jesse Jackson for not being black enough when they don't toe the line on their little pet issues. If you don't believe in Jesse's entitlement mindset and properly genuflect at the black victimhood establishment, you're an Uncle Tom.

Hell, some of the morons from that mindset were calling Powell a house n****r even with his affirmative action views.

[TexasTiger 13,029]

Actually, otter has a point. Black candidates get raked over the coals all the time by the old-guard, career s***stirrers like Jesse Jackson for not being black enough when they don't toe the line on their little pet issues. If you don't believe in Jesse's entitlement mindset and properly genuflect at the black victimhood establishment, you're an Uncle Tom.

Hell, some of the morons from that mindset were calling Powell a house n****r even with his affirmative action views.

Jesse and Sharpton are not big fans of Obama. Obama is his own man. He will succeed or fail on his own terms.

The fact remains, Powell would have gotten nowhere in the Republican nominating process. He would have had far better luck as a Dem.

[otterinbham 0]

I would have voted for Colin Powell in a heartbeat. Oh, I forgot. One has to take a political litmus test to be considered black.

No, but one does have to take one to be considered sufficiently Republican for the primary voting base-- Republicans would have NEVER nominated the pro-choice, pro-affirmative action, Colin Powell. Not to mention the fact that he would simply sound too reasonable talking about international relations to have been trusted by Republican primary voters. Condi, too, for that matter.

You forget that there are two completely distinct blocs of voters within the GOP: The Guns, God, and Guts crowd and those who seek to limit the role of government. I would argue that the Christianist wing of the Republican party is actually seeking to expand the role of government, thereby making it a bully pulpit with which to push its social agenda.

Given how many GOP insiders have begged Colin Powell to run, I'm not sure where you get that opinion. Abortion simply isn't the hot button issue in this campaign that it has been in previous contests. McCain, at best, has a divided opinion on the subject of abortion, and is certainly no firebrand on the subject. Giuliani is decidedly pro-choice, and his stance on this subject seems to have hurt him a lot less than his personality and his personal baggage. I think we'll see McCain open up a lead on Huckabee soon, which tells me that any candidate with centrist views, Powell included, would have done well, too. In fact, I would offer that had Powell not acted as point man in the UN with his WMD pitch (Which, to me, he was burned badly by awful intelligence), he would be the front runner today.

A shame, actually, because then we would probably see Republicans and Democrats having black candidates with a good chance for success this primary season.

[TexasTiger 13,029]

I would have voted for Colin Powell in a heartbeat. Oh, I forgot. One has to take a political litmus test to be considered black.

No, but one does have to take one to be considered sufficiently Republican for the primary voting base-- Republicans would have NEVER nominated the pro-choice, pro-affirmative action, Colin Powell. Not to mention the fact that he would simply sound too reasonable talking about international relations to have been trusted by Republican primary voters. Condi, too, for that matter.

You forget that there are two completely distinct blocs of voters within the GOP: The Guns, God, and Guts crowd and those who seek to limit the role of government. I would argue that the Christianist wing of the Republican party is actually seeking to expand the role of government, thereby making it a bully pulpit with which to push its social agenda.

Given how many GOP insiders have begged Colin Powell to run, I'm not sure where you get that opinion. Abortion simply isn't the hot button issue in this campaign that it has been in previous contests. McCain, at best, has a divided opinion on the subject of abortion, and is certainly no firebrand on the subject. Giuliani is decidedly pro-choice, and his stance on this subject seems to have hurt him a lot less than his personality and his personal baggage. I think we'll see McCain open up a lead on Huckabee soon, which tells me that any candidate with centrist views, Powell included, would have done well, too. In fact, I would offer that had Powell not acted as point man in the UN with his WMD pitch (Which, to me, he was burned badly by awful intelligence), he would be the front runner today.

A shame, actually, because then we would probably see Republicans and Democrats having black candidates with a good chance for success this primary season.

I don't forget that at all. I just know that the pro-choice bloc is very powerful in the GOP. It's even in the platform.

Powell has been pretty consistent that he would not run. You don't say which insiders supposedly have begged Powell to run for President or when this begging supposedly took place, so I'm not sure where you get your opinion. There was once talk of him running as VP for Bush in 2000, but it went no where.

My opinion comes from the reality that is the Republican nominating process. Evangelicals make up 60% of the Republicans in the first delegate selecting state-- Iowa-- and large numbers of the Republicans elsewhere, particularly the South. Huck should do well in SC. I can see McCain taking, it though. I won't rule out Romney, just because he can tap into his fortune to compete in Feb. 5th states and McCain has accepted matching funds and will be very limited financially.

McCain has been kissing up to the Religious Right after learning his lesson in 2000. He's not a firebrand on pro-life issues, but says all the "right" things, as Romney decided to also do once he decided to run. Guiliani is the only "pro-choice" guy in the bunch, and he's backpedaled quite a bit.

Guiliani's socially liberal views did, in fact, hurt him in Iowa. He did pitifully, even while still narrowly holding a national lead with less-focused-on-voting Republicans.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/20...al-primary.html

He's all but done now.

For Powell, the point is really moot anyway. But the chances of a pro-life/pro-affirmative action candidate of any race getting the Republican nomination in the current and recent climate is virtually zero.

[MDM4AU 336]

Actually, otter has a point. Black candidates get raked over the coals all the time by the old-guard, career s***stirrers like Jesse Jackson for not being black enough when they don't toe the line on their little pet issues. If you don't believe in Jesse's entitlement mindset and properly genuflect at the black victimhood establishment, you're an Uncle Tom.

Hell, some of the morons from that mindset were calling Powell a house n****r even with his affirmative action views.

Jesse and Sharpton are not big fans of Obama. Obama is his own man. He will succeed or fail on his own terms.

The fact remains, Powell would have gotten nowhere in the Republican nominating process. He would have had far better luck as a Dem.

I'm not sure he would have had any better luck. My wife tells me all the black teachers where she works want Hillary and joke about whites wanting to vote for Obama. Even the Alabama Democratic Conference, the black wing of the state's Democratic Party "overwhelmingly endorsed Clinton" according to this article in Sunday's Bamaham News.

[TexasTiger 13,029]

Actually, otter has a point. Black candidates get raked over the coals all the time by the old-guard, career s***stirrers like Jesse Jackson for not being black enough when they don't toe the line on their little pet issues. If you don't believe in Jesse's entitlement mindset and properly genuflect at the black victimhood establishment, you're an Uncle Tom.

Hell, some of the morons from that mindset were calling Powell a house n****r even with his affirmative action views.

Jesse and Sharpton are not big fans of Obama. Obama is his own man. He will succeed or fail on his own terms.

The fact remains, Powell would have gotten nowhere in the Republican nominating process. He would have had far better luck as a Dem.

I'm not sure he would have had any better luck. My wife tells me all the black teachers where she works want Hillary and joke about whites wanting to vote for Obama. Even the Alabama Democratic Conference, the black wing of the state's Democratic Party "overwhelmingly endorsed Clinton" according to this article in Sunday's Bamaham News.

Clinton started with a huge advantage-- folks try to pick a winner and assumed that was her. But she's having trouble overcoming her lack of political skills. Barring a collapse by Obama, it is uphill for her.

[Wishbone 0]

Maybe Obama will replace MLK as the new Black Jesus for everyone to worship. A lot of people will not be able to resist Obama's siren call this election. In their eyes it will validate them as good people, worthy of admiration and salvation. People would much rather feel good about themselves that think about cost/benefit analysis or actions and their consequences.

Remember...this is the same electorate that voted a President into office because he played the sax on Arsenio Hall. I doubt they will fail to disappoint this time. In the meantime I'll be playing the lyre.

[TDAuburn 2]

I thought when the National Anthem was played, you were supposed to hold your hand over your heart, not your hands in front of your nuts?Photo

[TitanTiger 20,511]

Bollocks. I've done the same thing myself. Many people place their hand over their heart during the Pledge of Allegiance but sometimes don't during the national anthem, instead just clasping their hands in front or behind them. The main thing that matters is a respectful posture and being at attention.

There are other photos of him where he has put his hand over his heart during the national anthem:

I know there's probably some actual procedure that is technically correct, but people aren't taught that stuff much anymore. I'm hardly going to make a decision on the presidency based on some minor quibble like this.

[GalensGhost 0]

Maybe Obama will replace MLK as the new Black Jesus for everyone to worship. A lot of people will not be able to resist Obama's siren call this election. In their eyes it will validate them as a good people, worthy of admiration and salvation. People would much rather feel good about themselves that think about cost/benefit analysis or actions and their consequences.

Remember...this is the same electorate that voted a President into office because he played the sax on Arsenio Hall. I doubt they will fail to disappoint this time. In the meantime I'll be playing the lyre.

And as long as people throw their support behind fringe candidates with zero chance of winning *cough* Ron Paul *cough* then this country has the opportunity to elect an empty suit with nothing more concrete than rhetoric and platitudes like Obama.

In case you forgot it was the loons who rallied behind Ross Perot who helped Clinton overcome Bush I way back when. If Perot doesn't make a run we might have no memory whatsoever of Bill Clinton and would be pondering the legacy of President Dole.

So just keep waving the Ron Paul flag. It's a vote for Obama, Hillary or Edwards.

[RunInRed 16,492]

Maybe Obama will replace MLK as the new Black Jesus for everyone to worship. A lot of people will not be able to resist Obama's siren call this election. In their eyes it will validate them as a good people, worthy of admiration and salvation. People would much rather feel good about themselves that think about cost/benefit analysis or actions and their consequences.

Remember...this is the same electorate that voted a President into office because he played the sax on Arsenio Hall. I doubt they will fail to disappoint this time. In the meantime I'll be playing the lyre.

And as long as people throw their support behind fringe candidates with zero chance of winning *cough* Ron Paul *cough* then this country has the opportunity to elect an empty suit with nothing more concrete than rhetoric and platitudes like Obama.

In case you forgot it was the loons who rallied behind Ross Perot who helped Clinton overcome Bush I way back when. If Perot doesn't make a run we might have no memory whatsoever of Bill Clinton and would be pondering the legacy of President Dole.

So just keep waving the Ron Paul flag. It's a vote for Obama, Hillary or Edwards.

While I refuse to go negative, I think calling Obama an "empty suit" is a bit of a cheap shot and honestly, it's pretty ironic coming from a Rudy supporter. I'm sure some said the same thing about JFK. Regardless, I'll continue to support some one who I think can end the partisan gridlock in Washington, some one who can solve problems, and some one who will actually bring the country together to get something done. If Obama is an empty suit because he hasn't been sitting in Washington for the last 20 years, then I'll take an empty suit all day long.

[GalensGhost 0]

Maybe Obama will replace MLK as the new Black Jesus for everyone to worship. A lot of people will not be able to resist Obama's siren call this election. In their eyes it will validate them as a good people, worthy of admiration and salvation. People would much rather feel good about themselves that think about cost/benefit analysis or actions and their consequences.

Remember...this is the same electorate that voted a President into office because he played the sax on Arsenio Hall. I doubt they will fail to disappoint this time. In the meantime I'll be playing the lyre.

And as long as people throw their support behind fringe candidates with zero chance of winning *cough* Ron Paul *cough* then this country has the opportunity to elect an empty suit with nothing more concrete than rhetoric and platitudes like Obama.

In case you forgot it was the loons who rallied behind Ross Perot who helped Clinton overcome Bush I way back when. If Perot doesn't make a run we might have no memory whatsoever of Bill Clinton and would be pondering the legacy of President Dole.

So just keep waving the Ron Paul flag. It's a vote for Obama, Hillary or Edwards.

While I refuse to go negative, I think calling Obama an "empty suit" is a bit of a cheap shot and honestly, it's pretty ironic coming from a Rudy supporter. I'm sure some said the same thing about JFK. Regardless, I'll continue to support some one who I think can end the partisan gridlock in Washington, some one who can solve problems, and some one who will actually bring the country together to get something done. If Obama is an empty suit because he hasn't been sitting in Washington for the last 20 years, then I'll take an empty suit all day long.

I listened to Obama's speeches. I watched him in the debate. He offers nothing of substance, only the vague and non-specific concept of "change." His responses remind me of the answers I get when I question my second-grader about politics.

What's your opinion on gas prices?

"They are too high"

What would you do about that?

"Lower them"

Obama really has nothing at all to say. His entire candidacy is based on personality -- yes, including the novelty of being a well-spoken black politician who rarely stoops to race baiting unlike Jesse, Al and the other reverends of that ilk. And that's simply not enough.

There's no comparison whatsoever between Rudy -- who offers ideas and the means to implement them -- and Obama -- who offers a smile and a theory.

[RunInRed 16,492]

I'm surprised Galen...you are usually a pretty good listener. But because I'm such a nice guy, I'll give you a link to his energy plan:

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/pdf/EnergyFactSheet.pdf

And since you are a fan of details, you can compare and contrast this to Rudy's energy plan:

http://www.joinrudy2008.com/commitment/indepth/7

Could some one objective look at these and opine as to which plan is the most detailed about the what candidate would do (but not necessarily what you personally agree with).

[GalensGhost 0]

I'm surprised Galen...you are usually a pretty good listener. But because I'm such a nice guy, I'll give you a link to his energy plan:

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/pdf/EnergyFactSheet.pdf

And since you are a fan of details, you can compare and contrast this to Rudy's energy plan:

http://www.joinrudy2008.com/commitment/indepth/7

Could some one objective look at these and opine as to which plan is the most detailed about the what candidate would do (but not necessarily what you personally agree with).

These are hardly the final words from either candidate. There are also many more issues than energy. Obama is 60% hype, 20% rhetoric, 10% pandering, 5% image and 5% substance.

[TexasTiger 13,029]

I'm surprised Galen...you are usually a pretty good listener. But because I'm such a nice guy, I'll give you a link to his energy plan:

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/pdf/EnergyFactSheet.pdf

And since you are a fan of details, you can compare and contrast this to Rudy's energy plan:

http://www.joinrudy2008.com/commitment/indepth/7

Could some one objective look at these and opine as to which plan is the most detailed about the what candidate would do (but not necessarily what you personally agree with).

These are hardly the final words from either candidate. There are also many more issues than energy. Obama is 60% hype, 20% rhetoric, 10% pandering, 5% image and 5% substance.

Careful, Galen...you appear to be channeling Hillary Clinton.