Political Insider

By Copyleft

March 14, 2008 9:32 AM | Link to this

Ferraro said the same thing twenty years ago, about Jesse Jackson.

Curiously, she didn’t say anything, on EITHER occasion, about prominent female candidates rising to their position and gaining support because of their GENDER. I wonder why?

By Sven the Blog Catalyst

March 14, 2008 10:12 AM | Link to this

Just watching the Dems self-destruct is getting “funner and funner.” The whole party has become a loose, ungovernable alliance of potentially warring special interest groups, none of which, alone, has the support and backing of a majority of Americans — feminists vs. blacks vs. gays. vs environmentalists. vs unionists vs. trade protectionists vs. peaceniks, etc., etc., etc. Once those special interests begin turning on each other, things unravel quickly. Now, the Convention — that’ll be even MORE “funner” to watch.

By Carlos Navarro

March 14, 2008 10:27 AM | Link to this

Geraldine,

You’re quoted as saying that the response of Obama’s campaign to your comments was that they “did it to hurt Hillary.”

Well, weren’t your remarks meant to hurt Obama? And that “spigot” of hate mail you complain you are getting, is it coming from Obama’s staff or from individual citizens speaking their mind?

And as to hurting Hillary, she and Bill, her de facto Co-President running mate have already done that. Their sordid past is an open book—the Travelgate, Pardongate, Chinagate, cattle-futures, Whitewater scandals; the using Marines as waiters; the IRS auditing of critics; the hiring of detectives to dig up dirt on women seduced by Bill; the Monica Lewsinki trysts in the rooms of the White House; the 50+ deaths by murder, suicide, accidents and sudden illnesses of people connected the Clinton regime; the Impeachment.

All that is bound to come out and derail the schemes of the Clintons machine to retake power.

My advice to you, Geraldine, is to fade back into the woodwork and enjoy your retirement.

By K

March 14, 2008 10:31 AM | Link to this

Obama’s campaign has alluded on many occasions that Hillary’s run for office is based on her husband being President. In the SC debate he said: “Some times I can’t tell who I’m running against.” I found that remark to be disparaging, as if the only reason Hillary was a viable candidate was because of her husband, that she couldn’t do it on her own. No one questioned whether that comment was sexist. The press just accepted it, and played the clip over and over again, without any interpretation, as if it was an argument Hillary was going to have to deal with and answer. Ferraro suggests something similar about race in regard to Obama and everyone questions it as rascist.

How is it racist to suggest that blackness is an asset?? If anything, that suggests we’ve gotten past seeing race as a barrier. When the question of sex comes up, whether or not Hillary has an advantage because of it, everyone talks about it freely, some agreeing, some disagreeing. Ferraro demanded we do the same thing with race. Good for her - that’s exactly what we need to do. Good for her for not apologizing. Everyone needs to stop walking around on eggshells trying not to hurt Obama’s feelings. He’s a Presidential candidate for crying out loud, not a Cub Scout.

By johnx

March 14, 2008 10:33 AM | Link to this

When one is at her stage of career, who really listens.

While I was never pro Ferraro, in her defense, she did indicate that her famous failed run for office occurred because the hopeful Pres wanted to “break the mold” by choosing a female.

By Joe

March 14, 2008 10:34 AM | Link to this

Maybe everyone should start to question if Hillary would be in the position she is in if she were married to Bill Clinton. Since when does sleeping with the President make you qualified to be president? Maybe Monica should consider running too.

By Churchill

March 14, 2008 10:59 AM | Link to this

As a lifelong Republican, I am enjoying the racism that is on full display in the Democrat party. A white woman, Hitlery, is going to steal the nomination from, in the words of Sen. Joe Biden (D- MD), “The first articulate and clean African American” candidate to run for president. Maybe some of the “victims” in the democrat party will finally see that they have been used by powerful democrat whites for decades. Peace.

By Tangent

March 14, 2008 11:00 AM | Link to this

Maybe Mondale would have won if he’d chosen a VP candidate who had more to offer than just being a woman. Gender or race (or name) should not be the driving force behind a candidate. Beliefs and message should be.

We have already elected one official because of his name. And the Shrub proved to be among the worse presidents we’ve had in the U.S. Do we need to repeat history? McCain or Obama are better candidates as they break from the royal family status our political system risks devolving into. And of those two, Obama has an actual message, which explains why he is as popular as he is.

His success is not racial. It is because he offers something that transcends race, gender, or name. This is why Clinton is losing and will not gain the Democratic nomination without backroom deals: she does not have an actual message. She does not transcend her name or her gender.

Rob H.

By charles corley

March 14, 2008 11:03 AM | Link to this

gooooood morning/ is this the same bed wetter that married his 26 yr. old h.s. math teacher so he could dodge the draft. the same bed wetter that junked her when she was dying. the same bed wetter that was caught along with livingston and henry (hank to his girl friend) hyde, by larry flynt. the same bed wetter that helped pass a bill in 1986 and signed by ronnie r., who got elected on a pledge to stop busing, that took away the deduction for interest on consumer loans which included credit cards, car loans, bank loans and etc. and gave us the equity loan that has bankrupt america. the first vote i cast was for barry g. and it has been down hill since

By w00t

March 14, 2008 11:06 AM | Link to this

Well, if we’re going to play the “what-if” game then if it wasn’t for McCain’s Daddy and eventual capture, then he wouldn’t be in the position he is in. This is a man that has Crashed 4 aircraft, finished dead last in his class, received and given favors to get to the top, left his first wife for another woman with power and political connections, etc, etc.

Saying that someone is in a position because of their color or gender is an easy cop-out when you can’t counter their ideas or how well they explain the issues. It just shows that the neocons are terrified of Hillary and Obama.

Deep inside, you people are shallow, and cannot accept a person for who they are. You would rather elect a white man to keep the status quo. A white man that has essentially stated that your jobs aren’t coming back and that there are going to be more wars. Is that what you want, someone with a short temper that might be willing to start another conflict at a moments notice, another white man to spend this country further into oblivion? Just to keep the status quo?

By Neko

March 14, 2008 11:42 AM | Link to this

I have several comments. #1 Its good to know the truth about Gingrich. He and Ferraro seem to be forgetting that a majority of Americans want change. is the idea of CHANGE. Getting away from politics as usual and the good old boy system. We need to clean house in Washington and get folks like Gingrich back home with their grandkids. If I were Hillary I would be just as upset with the comment because it also implies that she is only winning because she’s a woman. What kind of mess is that! #2 Florida and Michigan knew what they were doing with their elections. Is time to pay the piper for the decision. Otherwise it sends a poor message to our children. #3 The entire election process needs a re-vamp. These super-delegates are a joke. Its just another form of money control in this country. The haves keeping the money and the power away from the have nots.

By Good news!

March 14, 2008 11:43 AM | Link to this

This is good news for racist crackers, sexist adulterers, and minorities alike: When Obama becomes President next January, the race card in America goes away!! Affirmative action will be sooooo last century. People of ALL races, religions, and genders will be judged solely on the content of their characters and the achievements they, themselves have earned. (Achievements by association, and random endorsements will no longer count, right?) No more “because the po-po are racist, you must acquit, regardless of the other facts in evidence,” and no more “You just made it because of your skin color, so I don’t respect you.”

Right? It’s a new dawn, it’s a new day, and we’re all feelin’ good. Right?

By Ci2Eye

March 14, 2008 11:48 AM | Link to this

W00t speaks truth. It is undeniable that McCain likely would’ve ever had the military career he had if his father and grandfather hadn’t been prominent Admirals. It’s well known that he wouldn’t have become an aviator based on his ability alone. It was Daddy who got him into the cockpit.

And today, it’s that “story” of the aviator who was shot down and held hostage that captivates Americans and his story is cited over and over as the reason voters selected him. It’s not ability or intellect because there were smarter, more talented Republicans running. It was the label “war hero” that sealed the deal.

The reality is that there are factors that go beyond mere experience and accomplishment that help many people select candidates. We like the narrative of their life, their looks, their family, the fact that they are an ‘outsider” or something unique about them. That is undeniable but that is also what Ferraro said. If Mr. Obama weren’t part black everything would be different. His story wouldn’t be so alluring and without it, America would simply see him as an inspirational but inexperienced man running for President. Take the novelty away from him and look merely at his record and he isn’t in any way outstanding. Neither is John McCain.

Why is it wrong to merely acknowledge the obvious?

By Dave

March 14, 2008 11:55 AM | Link to this

You know if Obama had not shown any achievement while at Harvard and was a kid who barely got in school and barely got by ok maybe the argument might hold water. Reality is he was president of Harvard Law Review and demonstrated the highest level of academic achievement. You really want to know who was lucky it was George Bush he won the genetic lottery probably got in Yale only because of his Dad and was a student who showed little. His entire career was based on friends of Dad pulling the string.

By Ron Robinson

March 14, 2008 11:57 AM | Link to this

Indeed, let’s be honest and admit that white people also vote for candidates just because they are white. But non-whites are supposed to believe that 60 year old white men are the universal candidates who can represent everyone and we should ignore thier ethnicity and gender.

By Rick

March 14, 2008 11:58 AM | Link to this

Americans want change Everyone is tired of the same old political game. Please keep the focus on Change in America and let’s not get side tracked by the desperate attempts of losers to confuse the real issues at hand. Obama represents Change in America and he should have the support of everyone. Senator Clinton thought she was an automatic and didn’t have to put in the work.

By obazee

March 14, 2008 12:04 PM | Link to this

The Clintons are putting self interest above party/national interest. when the presidental election is lost, History will remember those whose omision and/or commision cost us the election.

By Sam

March 14, 2008 12:08 PM | Link to this

I agree Americans wants change.

{Can you break a 20 brother?}

By Nick Cooper (nickcooper.com)

March 14, 2008 12:17 PM | Link to this

It’s not about whether she was right or wrong. It’s fine for us to speculate about why a candidate is popular, including the influence of race. People working for a candidate, however, are trying to discourage you from voting for the other candidate and race should not be part of that.

By Todd Peterson

March 14, 2008 12:18 PM | Link to this

I am anti-Republican, and I don’t have any love for Gingrich’s line of thought. And I am an Obama supporter; but I think Gingrich is right on this.

The irony is that Obama’s promise is as a symbol of the move to a color-blind system, but he couldn’t be a symbol of that system if he wasn’t black.

By John

March 14, 2008 12:19 PM | Link to this

Pretty ironic that Mr.Gingrich is talking about being honest? I think he should be the last one who should talk about being honest. I think Ms.Ferraro’s comments were racist I am not an African American, and I think people like her has no place in politics or in any of the public office. Everyone should be aware of these type of people.

By Brian

March 14, 2008 12:19 PM | Link to this

What Ferraro said was very stupid and the fact that Gingrich agrees, proves the point. What they are trying to do is make it seem that Obama is an affirmative action baby. Which he is not. We are talking about a Harvard Law grad, a constituitional professor, state & U.S. Senator. He has worked hard to get where he is and how dare Ferraro or Gingrich or Clinton try to marginalize him as the black guy.

By Sarah

March 14, 2008 12:20 PM | Link to this

Copyleft, you are actually a 100 percent wrong. I mean, did you even listen to Ferraro’s comments, like, at all. She said she was only given the VP spot because she was a woman. This was her main point. She demonstrated how both RACE and GENDER can be actually be a crutch as we try to turn the page on discrimination in this country.

By Sarah

March 14, 2008 12:20 PM | Link to this

Copyleft, you are actually a 100 percent wrong. I mean, did you even listen to Ferraro’s comments, like, at all. She said she was only given the VP spot because she was a woman. This was her main point. She demonstrated how both RACE and GENDER can actually be a crutch as we try to turn the page on discrimination in this country.

By annonymouse

March 14, 2008 12:20 PM | Link to this

The Republicans are laughing all the way to the White House.

By Cindi Overfield

March 14, 2008 12:20 PM | Link to this

I don’t think Ferraro is the first to bring this up. For months the press has been calling the Democratic race “historic”. What makes this race historic? It couldn’t be because we have an African American and a Woman running for the Democratic nomination, could it?

By srikant madhusudan

March 14, 2008 12:22 PM | Link to this

And, following Ms Ferraro’s logic, would HRC be where she is if she were a Mrs Senator Joelle Brown /Smythe et al ?

By gttim

March 14, 2008 12:23 PM | Link to this

And lets be clear here, the only reason Ferraro was ever even in politics is because of her family. Her name and family connections made her what she is. She spent her entire time as a politician sucking up to the establishment and preserving the status quo- which includes the family of politicians getting supported by the establishment and any challengers to them being discouraged. She has never done anything positive. She actually helped drag Democratic presidential ticket she was on down. Her husband’s and family’s connections to the mob were blown wide open during the campaign. She is a nobody that never should have been.

By John Livingston

March 14, 2008 12:23 PM | Link to this

I’m amazed, that all of a sudden in America, if you want to get ahead all you need to do is to be black. So is that why when I applied for a job that I (black man) was passed over 3 times before I got an offer and after I got the job I found out that the 2 of the 3 people that they had hired instead of me had been out of the field for 10 years of more. I could give another personal example, But I will leave it at that. Why is Hillary a senator from New York instead of her homestate of Arkansas? Is it because her husband was president or her long record of political service to the good people of New York?

By JB

March 14, 2008 12:23 PM | Link to this

I’m sick of this. If they’re complaining Barack’s only getting to where he is because he’s black, it’s equally true to say all past presidents only achieved their presidency based on being WHITE. The hidden assumption is the black people are voter for a lesser candidate when they SHOULD be voting for the white candidate. Yeah, it’s racism. Completely. People totally ignore the racism that got white people so much of what they have.

By robz

March 14, 2008 12:23 PM | Link to this

I think it somewhat absurd to suggest that Mr. Obama’s ethnicity has helped him get where he is today in a country with as chequered a history in race relations and fair treatment of minorities as America. If Mr. Obama was white he probably be a republican and already be president.

By Nachum

March 14, 2008 12:24 PM | Link to this

I think that many black people vote for Obama based solely on his skin color; if Obama was white many of them would have voted for Hillary. But white people vote for Obama because they like him, and has nothing to do with skin color.

By EB JEB

March 14, 2008 12:24 PM | Link to this

Sen Obama isn’t BLACK! Read his book he is of MIXED racial background. SO get over it! IF you call him white you are just as correct as calling him black! “My father was dark as night… my mother as white as milk.”

Sen Clinton is a female, non-male, not of the masculin gender. Forget the EMOTION of CHANGE and think. Listen and learn. People can’t direct other people. And those who get into positions to lead by shear emotion are the worst. If there is no substance then there should be no one listening.

By je

March 14, 2008 12:25 PM | Link to this

what is funny about all of this…is that neither Clinton nor Obama directly comes out and speaks about gender and color…its the AMERICAN PEOPLE that have done this…gossip and pokes at different groups of people has allowed this to happen…and will again in 500 years…we are not equal, we are not the same and never will be in the face of the american people.

By Dude

March 14, 2008 12:25 PM | Link to this

I must admit, there were some pretty interesting arguments for Obama becoming the next President. I agree, he is the smartest of the bunch, the most articulate, and the only one with a message. I love the fact that he refuses to stoop to gutter policits with Clinton or McCain.

The other two candidates are carbon copies of what we have seen in Washington for the past 20 years.

Although, Clinton is different, only because she is a woman. She will offer up the same big business, special interest mess that we currently have.

By Elizabeth Rogers

March 14, 2008 12:25 PM | Link to this

I suppose in that case it is just and correct to say that if Hilary Clinton were not a woman and a Clinton she would not be in the position of a running mate for Obama. That is also true. If she didn’t have money and political ties she wouldn’t have a chance to be where she is today. If Obama is in the race because he is black then hooray for him, he has come a long way baby. On his own… Elizabeth

By BL

March 14, 2008 12:25 PM | Link to this

They keep talking about this stuff that really is so trivial compared to what is really going on .. Dog and pony show so noone wakes up to the fact that the finanicial instatutions of the US are crumbling. That fact that none of them talk about what really matters . Bunch of children running the world

By Tony

March 14, 2008 12:26 PM | Link to this

I response to what Tangent said - The fact is Walter Mondale was actually ahead in all polls until his final debate against Ronnie Ray-Gun. Ferraro would have been the VP if not for that.

In case you don’t remember, or are not old enough to know, in that debate there was question about raising taxes. Ronnie, doing as his astrologer had advised, said he was going to lower taxes. Mondale stated very clearly that yes taxes would be going up if he was elected, and that Reagan would raise them too - which he did, except for the highest tax brackets, their’s stayed the same. The result of that move by Reagan, actually caused the economic downturn that did in the first Bush, which got Bill Clinton elected.

If not for that few minutes in that last debate, Mondale would have been President and Ferraro would have been VP.

However, to be even about that, I do feel that he selected her because of her gender. But at the same time, you had to give her credit then because she would not back down from anything.

By anna

March 14, 2008 12:26 PM | Link to this

To Joe; Hillary is where she is because she has spent her life in public service,starting as a paige when she was a teenager. Perhaps if people would look at the facts instead of following people like Oprah, like sheep we could elect a president that was qualified instead of ones like G>B. who don’t have a clue.

By Richard

March 14, 2008 12:27 PM | Link to this

Yes… at the end of the day the democrats will demonstrate a strong proclivity towards narcisism, denial, sinfulness and hatefulness towards each other and society at large. When naked self interet (invested in many of the wrong places and people) rears its ugly head we find that the ethics of Molly Yard, Carl Marx and Freud are quite limited …. and primitive… such a thin veneer of civilized public servanthood… lubricated with happy pills and cocktails… Clinton sytle… makes you want to vomit. What has happened to the minds of the American people…who have drifted further and furhter away from rationale thinking… one suspects that emerging models of political prowess used by democrats no longer assess the mind and soul as the independent, but the dependent variables… subordinated to the world, the flesh and devil… and their selfish, wicked agendas often hidden from the cameras.

By Jeff

March 14, 2008 12:29 PM | Link to this

Quote: “When Obama becomes President next January, the race card in America goes away!!”

So are you saying that white people vote for Obama because they are intimidated and not because they think he is a better candidate?

By Jeff

March 14, 2008 12:30 PM | Link to this

Quote: “When Obama becomes President next January, the race card in America goes away!!”

So are you saying that white people vote for Obama because they are intimidated and not because they think he is a better candidate?

By Ed

March 14, 2008 12:32 PM | Link to this

Newt is one of a few true conservatives. His contract with America helped the conservatives to win control of Congress. If Obama had ever been an administrator of governmetal agency or a corporation, he might have some experience to govern. If Illinois wasn’t easily the most corrupt political machine left on the face of the earth, Obama might have some polital clout of his own. Obama is where he is because he is in the right place at the right time, that is usually called LUCK.

By Richard

March 14, 2008 12:33 PM | Link to this

Just imagine what a hideous embarassment Ferraro would have been had she won with Mondale… wow… relatively speaking, such would have rendered the likes of Dan Quail eligible for a nobel peace prize for superior statesmanship.

By bhagwan deol

March 14, 2008 12:36 PM | Link to this

The problem we americans have is trying to be politically correct. to me that is a stupid notion. americans should be proud to be american. obama should have declared that his father was a muslim so he has muslim middle name but he has every right to be christian.BUT HE OWES TO THE COUNTRY TO GET AWAY FROM HIS RACIST PREACHERAND NATION OF ISLAM .HE SHOULD HAVE DECLARED THAT HE IS PROUD AMERICAN WHO HAPPENS TO BE BLACK . HE IS TRYING TO GUISE IT AND USING IT FOR HIS ADVANTAGE SO WHEN IT COMES THAT HE IS BLACK AND HIS MIDDLE NAME IS HUSSIEN THEN HE LABEL OTHERS TO BE RACIST. FACT IS THAT HE IS THE BIGGEST RACIST WHO CLAIM NOT TO BE. THE DAY HE CONVINCES THE AMERICAN PEOPLE THAT HE IS A PROUD AMERICAN WHO HAPPENS TO BE BLACK THEN THIS ISSUE WILL BE DEAD BUT THE PROBLEM IS THAT HE TURNS BLACK AMONG BLACKS AND TRY TO GO COLOURLESS WHEN WITH WHITES. HE IS TOO SLICK. bhagwan deol los angeles

By Me

March 14, 2008 12:36 PM | Link to this

It is sad that this is coming down to a race/gender issue. We have 2 minorities in the democratic campaign. There are gonna be blacks voting for Obama because of his race and thee are gonna be women voting for Clinton because of her gender. Dont assume every black person or every woman is voting based on gender or race though. My hope is that thos who vote based on race or gender end up cancelling each other out and the winner ends up being based on people who look at each candidates views instead of appearance.

By Chris

March 14, 2008 12:37 PM | Link to this

I think Mr. Gingrich and Ms. Ferraro are missing the point. Of course one can discuss race and gender in these campaigns. That is what makes this primary historic. Of course female voters are turning out for Senator Clinton and African-American voters are turning out strong for Senator Obama. That is the truth Mr. Gingrich.

But Ms. Ferraro did more than that. In saying that Senator Obama is where he is because of his race, belittles all of the talents he has and that he has brought to this election. He is a noble man, and incredible orator, and could be a great leader bridging divides and representing America in the world. That is why he is where he is. That is why he has won states like Vermont and Iowa that have huge white populations.

Ms. Ferraro’s comments are also insulting to all of Mr. Obama’s supporters and people that voted for him, as though they are simply caught up in a fad, some political correctness or affirmative action. Ms. Ferraro, people support Senator Obama because they believe in him, and believe he would be great for America.

By Tom

March 14, 2008 12:37 PM | Link to this

I am a Republican, but was not a McCain supporter during the primaries. Similarly, I am not a Newt Gingrich fan because of his personal failings and the way he lost his way after the various parts of the Contract with America was voted on.

However, both Ferraro and Gingrich were totally correct. In her remarks she acknowledged that she wouldn’t have been the VP candidate if she weren’t female. Gingrich’s personal foibles have nothing to do with the weight of his comments and all of you who want to re-direct there are idiots. As much as I’m not a fan of his, Gingrich is about as saavy of a political analyst as there is — if you’d listen to the comments instead of acting with your typical moveon and kos kids glasses.

Finally, as opposed to John “Look I’m scratched, send me home” Kerry, John McCain is a true war hero. Despite wounds suffered on the Forrestal, he refused to go home. Despite torture, he refused early release. He wins that debate against Obama or Clinton without breaking a sweat.

By J. Morrison

March 14, 2008 12:38 PM | Link to this

And using the logic of Mr. Gingrich and Ms. Ferraro, the only reason Mr. McCain is the front runner for the Conservatives is because he was a POW of the Vietnam war.

I am a liberal, proud of it, and will vote for which ever person wins the Democratic nomination.

By charlie

March 14, 2008 12:38 PM | Link to this

Dinosaurs. Not because they are old, but because this breed of politician is becoming extinct.

This isn’t just about Ferraro being wrong about Barack being where he’s at “largely because he’s black”, but because of the lack of effort to really examine why he is there. I think there are some very useful lessons to learn from this campaign’s success and to learn these lessons (whether you are Democrat or Republican or from some other party) is to adapt and survive.

I think making the claim that his success is based on his race not only denigrates his accomplishments, but it also is a shame because it leaves an opportunity to learn and adapt and survive politically at the wayside. We can accept the line “the world changed after 9/11”, but we can’t accept the concept that politics can change. Learn how Obama is connecting with voters… and one can learn how to do the same or counter it. To use a football analogy… a team scores a TD on a screen pass because the other team blitzed. This is the other team saying “they scored because the running back takes steroids” instead of giving them credit for calling the right play and preparing themselves to defend against it next time.

By Karen California

March 14, 2008 12:38 PM | Link to this

Barack Obama ran against a black man in Illinois and WON

What say ye to that Newt?

Hello…Newt… are you still there?

And, Newt, you’re skipping over all of both Clinton’s black support and Obama’s white support.

But, Newt, I love ya. I heard you some months ago on the talk shows saying your party had to get with the times. You were the only respected republican seeing it from the outside and smart enough to know the power of Obama’s message, which is really just a reflection of the hearts and minds of Americans of all ages and ethnicity, and both genders.

Come on, Newt, re-invigorate your party! Don’t go down whining. Step up! Make your party rock!

By Luke

March 14, 2008 12:39 PM | Link to this

Ferraro should be fired, as should anyone that continues to categorize these candidates simply as black, white, and female. The public like to categorize people, it makes us feel better, it simplifies someone’s character and we don’t have to wrestle with ambiguities, subtleties and dualities. Mr. Gingrich and Ms. Ferarro know this, and they are playing off it. This a political cheap shot and it its a dangerous game. It is the root of hatred and tyranny and it manifests itself as an ugly division between people. So shame on you two. Obama, McCain and Clinton are remarkable people and not for one reason, they don’t need to be simplified, they need to be appreciated and respected and challenged fairly. We are fortunate to have such worthy candidates. Lets got on with the race!

By Insignificant

March 14, 2008 12:39 PM | Link to this

The Democratic Party should be promoting Democracy by doing away with this delegate nonsense and let the popular vote stand on it’s own. The votes are being counted anyway so why are we wasting more money on delegate votes which may or may not reflect the people’s choice. Both parties should embrace this and bring truth to the concept of each of us having a vote that actually counts! Remember, it’s supposed to be a Government Of, For and By the PEOPLE!!

By Rich

March 14, 2008 12:43 PM | Link to this

The only reason anyone has ever heard of Hillary Rodham is because her married name is Clinton. It is true that some people are voting for Obama because he is black, just as some people are voting for Clinton because she is a woman. The reason Ferraro’s statement is nasty and inappropriate is because its point was to undermine Obama through race. If she was being honest, as she claims, she would have said that Obama is where he is because of his color, and Hillary is where she is because of her gender. Notice how this “honest” person neglected to mention the second fact.

By Jen

March 14, 2008 12:44 PM | Link to this

Regardless of who made the comments, people should look at the content of the remark. To say that people totally disregard the race, gender, social background of a candidate is ludicrous. Of course those things matter to voters. Whether or not they should, its a fact that they do.

I’d like to see the campaigns move away from pointing out this garbage and get on to a discussion on issues. I don’t care if you’re a man, woman, white, black or pink with purple polka dots. What I do care about is if I think you’re qualified to run my country and I’m never going to know that until you start talking about what you stand for and stop finger pointing and pointing out the obvious.

By annonymouse

March 14, 2008 12:47 PM | Link to this

Quote: “If Illinois wasn’t easily the most corrupt political machine left on the face of the earth, Obama might have some polital clout of his own…”

Apparently, you have never been to or read about Louisiana. Makes Illinois look great.

By Don

March 14, 2008 12:47 PM | Link to this

Let’s consider sexist.

Has anyone looked at HRC? she’s a 2 bagger… maybe a three bagger… probably a six pack and a bottle of Ripple.

By Bob Gravy

March 14, 2008 12:50 PM | Link to this

I think that the Democrats are doing a fine job of showing the American people why they should not hold the highesst office. As an independent I am finding it harder and harder to resist the sanity that McCain and the Republicans are offerring in comparison to the race/gender nonsense of the Democrats.

By Sven the Blog Catalyst

March 14, 2008 12:50 PM | Link to this

So, what WILL happen at the convention if Hillary wins Pennsylvania (almost assured), Florida (likely, assuming there’s a vote), and Michigan (who knows, but entirely possible, assuming there’s a vote). And if she wins her share of the remaining smaller primaries? The popular vote and delegate counts will be oh-so-close. Brokered convention? It’ll be thoroughly ugly, no matter how that shakes out.

And NOTHING is scarier than a bunch of mooney-eyed Obama supporters chanting “change” and “hope” at every turn. I would respect them if they knew WHAT that “change” or “hope” would entail, but those details seem curiously unimportant. The old adage regarding “frying pans” and “fires” should be instructive — that was a “change,” too, y’all. Word.

By johnmk

March 14, 2008 12:50 PM | Link to this

What everyone seems to forget is that Senator Obama is biracial; his mother was white and his father was black. He was raised in a white family. It would be interesting to see a half caucasion/half oriental person run for president. Would they be considered oriental or caucasion?

By Don

March 14, 2008 12:51 PM | Link to this

HRC - a 2 bagger… unless you’re really drunk.

By Charles Manning (manning120)

March 14, 2008 12:52 PM | Link to this

As previous writers have noted, many of the candidates other than Obama find favor among some of the voters because of things having nothing to do with the “content of their character,” their knowledge and experience, etc. But affirmative action is a big negative in this situation. Ferraro’s comment, and also Gingrich’s, appear to be racist because, in the context of the campaign, they suggest that blacks are inherently inferior to others, so that when they achieve something, it has to be because whites have given them an advantage. Both Hillary and Obama handled this correctly. Ferraro shows herself tone deaf by not recognizing the merit of the objections.

By Roderick

March 14, 2008 12:54 PM | Link to this

He is the best candadiate that just happens to be black. Chill, white america we are not as evil as you with power.

He went to havard law, he is intelliegent and has abiltiy to speak with the sense of wanting to change the look and process of washington.

What is really silly is Newt crying becuase he had to exit the back of air force one and he lefthis wife on her death bed. also, while he was trying to bring down bill clinton he was having an affair.

Yet you march him out like he provides the almighty word.

By marko

March 14, 2008 12:55 PM | Link to this

This is really funny. Neil and Newt seem to think that Obama’s skin color is giving him an unfair advantage. I’m sure they also believe W would have still been elected by an overwhelming minority had he not been George the First baby boy. While I’m not convinced Obama will be a great president, I can’t comprehend how he could possibly be any worse than what we’ve had the last eight years. Besides after Forty-three white boys in a row it might just be the right time for a little change.

By Bianka

March 14, 2008 1:01 PM | Link to this

Bravo for Ferraro about time the white folks start calling it what it is regardless of the of whomever it is running. Ambition is the word an ambitious black man wanting to be the 1st black american president of the united staes and an ambitious woman.

By Bianka

March 14, 2008 1:03 PM | Link to this

Bravo for Ferraro about time the white folks start calling it what it is regardless of the of whomever it is running. Ambition is the word an ambitious black man wanting to be the 1st black american president of the united states and an ambitious woman.

By Ricardo Rose

March 14, 2008 1:06 PM | Link to this

Newt Gingrich is so non-political??? I guess we all benefit from his non-political contributions!!!

By Zefyretta

March 14, 2008 1:07 PM | Link to this

I wonder if Clinton would have come this far if she didn’t have the ‘Clinton’ name. It seems to me that she is almost running on borrowed glory.

By Dana

March 14, 2008 1:07 PM | Link to this

Its bad enough that Hillary used Ms Ferrao as a shill, now Newt’s jumping on the bandwagon - give it a rest dude. JFK was in the same boat and look what happened there.

Its not about race or gender! Its about Honesty, Integrity, hope, and taking the moral high road.

Those are qualities that transcend party lines, race, and gender. It is something Obama’s opponents lack.

By Richard

March 14, 2008 1:08 PM | Link to this

In better days when morality and common sense had more sway on the minds and hearts of the American people, cartoonists would aptly characterize ‘studpid politics’ as a man with an entourage assembled on a bandstand under a big sign reading “CHANGE”. How far have we come…. how utterly ridiculous… a people whose foolhardyness warrent the punishment of a monster, a Trojan horse… You want change with little qualification except for fuzzy feelings, millions of aborted babies and national health care plans that sabatoge freedom and autonomy in ways which undermine basic legal fabrics protection basic civil liberties… HAVE AT IT! What God has given we should not destroy or squander… nor should the Jewish people give up what God has given them… FIND GOD and FIND a culture of life… NOT EVIL in a Trojan horse ready to take away the substance of our American way of life!

By Barbara

March 14, 2008 1:08 PM | Link to this

Race and gender will be with us for a very long time to address the comment blacks voted for Obama solely because his is black is wrong. Most voted for him because he is as qualified as any other candidate. We have voted for a peanut farmer, an oil man unable to speak correct grammar, and a former movie star. Senator is well educated, spoken and organized enough to turn all odds against him in his favor. A year ago the argument was he is not black enough and blacks would not support him. Now surprise surprise he’s BLACK. He is kicking A** and taking names he has shown the world that color is only skin deep and giving an equal opportunity hard work will bring you to the top. The memorial line “Judge by content of character and not by the color of their skin” mean any thing. Black had more to lose by supporting a candidate solely because he is black. He had to be viable prove that he could compete and win among All Americans. Don’t fall for the easy cop out. Gingrich, Ferraro and other who refuse to recognize Obama accomplishments and abilities to run a stellar campaign compete and WIN. What makes Hillary Presidential material? She’s a woman and Bill’s wife? None of these people speak to that issue this is another attempt to divert for the issue at hand winning the Presidency. Democrats don’t fall for it divide us and we fail.

By ill bred

March 14, 2008 1:09 PM | Link to this

That Newt sounds like the reasonable one here is how far the conservatives have fallen.

Conservatism is dead. Sen. Craig has sounded taps, with his flag at half-mast.

By dkahn

March 14, 2008 1:12 PM | Link to this

Gingrich is wrong. The misstep with the statement was attributing success solely on race. Every aspect about a candidate is relavent to the uniqueness of their campaign and appeal - pointing to race alone as the indicator is unenlightened.

It is fine to point out that his campaign is unique because he is black, but if your your argument is made to undermine the man by attributing success to his race - you’re going to have a problem with people who have their eyes open.

As a side note: I don’t think Obama’s race is working to his advantage right now in the polls of PA.

By tafb94

March 14, 2008 1:16 PM | Link to this

I believe this all just political strategy. Each candidate has to try everything legal and moral (sometimes not so legal and moral)to win this election. It doesn’t matter which party is either, republican or democrat, liberal or conservative. Politics are a cut throat business. You have to tell people what they want to here all the while knowing you can’t please everyone that may vote for you. Voters or people in general try to hold elected officials to this impossible standard of conduct but are unwilling to do the same in there own lives. So what do you do? You play the game and hope you get enough people to believe in you and maybe, just maybe you can do some good if you are elected. Everybody has secrets, flaws, shortcoming and so forth. Neither party is better than the other in that regard. As a democrat I would be willing to compromise on traditional democrat party views if a republican would be willing to do the same. Enough is enough with the bantering back and forth between the two parties. Is it really to much to think that we couldn’t work together for the common good of the country.

By Kim

March 14, 2008 1:18 PM | Link to this

This argument is so tired. No one is accusing Ferraro of being racist - just stupid and perhaps cunning at the same time. Yes, she is correct about her being chosen as a VP running mate simply because she was a woman, but Barack Obama chose to step into the race. Her statement was insulting because she is reducing all of his accomplishments down to his blackness. The big problem American is having right now is the fact that Barack Obama is Brilliant and has awoken a spirit in a great deal of American’s. He is kicking the Clinton’s butt all the while conducting himself w/ dignity He’s offering something fresh and different. Being an African American female, of course Barack Obama being black is a plus and a sense of pride for me, but it is not the reason I voted for him. To respond to Ferraro’s statement that if he were white, he wouldn’t be here is almost comical because actually Barack reminds me of an early Bill Clinton - minus the jaded past and womanizing. Let me also add that Barack & Michelle Obama are the only one’s that actually have some sense of morality. Bill Clinton abused his position w/ Lewinsky, Hillary is acting like she is running for Dictatorship instead of Presidency, John McCain had an affair on his disabled wife w/ his current wife, who is by the way a previous drug addict who stole prescription drugs from a charity she was working for. I simply choose Barack because he is the best - not because he’s black!!

By mr_xray

March 14, 2008 1:19 PM | Link to this

Obama has little political experience, is high on rhetoric and low on good ideas. Saying he’s pulling the troops out of Iraq, as the polls tell him to say, will bring doom to the Iraqi people and expand the evil of Muslim fundamentalism closer to this country with consequences considerably more deadly than 9/11.

Obama is a disciple of both Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. and Louis Farrakhan who are well known evil hate mongers who denigrate our nation at every opportunity. They both fuel white-black partisanships.

I dislike saying this but, the only good thing I can say about Obama is — he’s a good politician — he knows how to sling the BS. I’m surprised he’s deceiving so many people. And let’s be honest, Geraldine is right — with his credentials, the only reason why he’s gotten as far as he has in this presidential race is because he is a black man.

By Lynn

March 14, 2008 1:21 PM | Link to this

Yes, it is historic that we might have a female for President or an African-American, but is that why these candiates are where they are or why the majority of people vote for them, no. I think most people look at the person - not the race, gender or anything else, but the person and their message. Barack Obama has a message that is appealing - the Country is ready for change and he is a great communicator and acts Presidential> It is his message, deliverance, etc. that has gotten him where he is.
Is he lucky, maybe, but mostly talentened. So, even if you disagree with him, give him credit. There is more to him than race.

By Cole Roach

March 14, 2008 1:25 PM | Link to this

Does anyone think if it was Hillary Nobody, wife of William Nobody, would be anywhere but GONE!!!! We have had enough of the Bush-Clinton-Bush machine. After Hillary who, daughter Bush. To hell with white, black, female or male and all of the crap that has been and is still going on. The Only ONE Thing That Matters Is ALL BLOOD IS RED, the rest is just human non-since.

By Churchill

March 14, 2008 1:31 PM | Link to this

Libs see race and gender. They accuse the right of all sorts of ism’s, but it is the left that feels the need to label people/groups. The bloom is slowly falling off the liberal/Democrat rose. Peace.

By Eleanor

March 14, 2008 1:31 PM | Link to this

Yes there are people out there who listen to Newtie - I’m not one of them - because in my eyes he is a first class hypocrit - especially in comments about other’s personal lives - but he has also done some stupid things, said some stupid things - so who is he to call anyone stupid.

By George

March 14, 2008 1:33 PM | Link to this

I hope that you people are not as naive as you come across as. As a blck man anyone who doesn’t believe that Barack Obama has not done as well as he with blacks because he is balck is just plan stupid. He got what 92% of black vote in Mississippi. Call it anything u want but the only reason he has done as good as he has is because he is black and the black peole of the US want him. The sad part is that my fellow blacks just seem to be to stupid to understand that they are voteing for. 1. He does not even pledge to our Flag. 2. He does not beleive in JESUS CHRIST or GOD. 3. He talks about change but has never said what kind of change that will be. 4. He has admitted in his own book that he has done crack & smoked a joint or two in the past. It is time for my fellow blacks to wake up and smell the GREENs or Chittlins or something. This name does not speak for any self respecting black man or woman in this country.

By YMO

March 14, 2008 1:38 PM | Link to this

So basically Newt is saying the Barack Obama’s white mother (who passed) would not have been proud of him? or his white supporters around the world are not proud of him…we are only infatuated with his blackness?

Black people only vote for Black people? So why don’t we do a count of white and black people holding seats in political office today and see which race outweighs the other? Geraldine Ferraro and New Gingrich is delusional if they think they can sum up ALL of Barack Obama’s life long career accomplishments by saying it is only because he is successful because he is black. COME ON WE ALL KNOW THAT IS JUST A FLAT OUT LIE.

People need to wake up to the fact that historically black people have not come out in droves to vote for black candidates because we are MUCH harder and tougher on our own black race than any other. Black people don’t want a black politician who says what he thinks we want to hear or someone who is there because of affirmative action. Black people don’t want to elect any black candidate into office that will do something very, very wrong. Because when ONE black person makes a mistake ALL black people are judged for it. When one (or hundreds of thousands) of white people make a inhumane very public tragic mistake (slavery, poll-tax, segregation, equal rights, etc) that one individual person is held accountable and everyone else takes a pass. Meanwhile the entire white race benefits from it while everyone else suffers.

Can someone please explain that logic to me?

This is not about a ‘race card’ this is about the truth. America (unfortunately) is a hate filled, racist country. It is not just one race hating the other. It is many, many races tragically hating each other for the sins of our forefathers and for today’s society which just wants to turn a blind eye instead of addressing the blatant racism in jobs, housing, education, equal rights in general. This contest for Presidency is reminding everyone in a very media heightened way exactly how racist they really are. And the truth hurts.

Why are we not discussing the fact that Hillary Clinton is a white woman who would not be able to run for office if it wasn’t for who she was married to? Hillary’s experience amounts to 8 years in the white house and a couple of over seas visits where she did a song and dance show with Sinbad the comedian for the troops, A SPEECH in Northern Ireland (she did NOTHING else), and most recently 6 years as a NY Senator (has done NOTHING) in NYC. Because racist people would rather vote for a white inexperienced woman, before they vote for a qualified black man. Who said racism was dead?

THE MORE THINGS CHANGE…THE MORE THEY STAY THE SAME HUH?

By Jason Brown

March 14, 2008 1:40 PM | Link to this

Bold* Hey now. Being honest is not being racist. Barack Hussein Obama has made it this far… If any white politician with the same lack of experience as Obama was running for this nomination, he would not have gotten this far. Period. *

By Diogenes

March 14, 2008 1:47 PM | Link to this

So Obama gets, what, 92% of the black vote in Mississippi, which by definition means people are voting along racil lines. And, by logical extension, what will we get on a national scale if that happens in the general election? CLAYTON COUNTY, only BIGGER! Gee, no thanks.

You Obama supporters just kill me with all this “change” and “hope” talk. Change to what? How? No details, just “change.” Boy, was PT Barnum right on the money.

By GAconservative007

March 14, 2008 1:55 PM | Link to this

White Liberals are Racist

By linda

March 14, 2008 1:56 PM | Link to this

You guys are funny. Geraldine Farraro has outlived her legacy. It happens. Newt Gingrich, whom I used to respect, although I am a black woman, disappoints me. Barack Obama is white. And he is black. His mother was white and he was raised primarily by his white grandparents. His Kenyan father left him when he was two years old.

By mr_xray

March 14, 2008 2:11 PM | Link to this

Oh…Linda…do you think Obama checked the “white” box on his application to Harvard?

By annonymouse

March 14, 2008 2:17 PM | Link to this

The US is on the downhill run and the Republicans are laughing all the way to the White House. Stop all this nonsense and unite. Pitiful.

By annonymouse

March 14, 2008 2:20 PM | Link to this

mr x_ray, No, he checked the box which said “None of your business”!

By cory

March 14, 2008 2:26 PM | Link to this

People, to say that Obama is in the position he is in because he is black simply means that you could have taken any black man and they would be the frontrunner in this campaign and am I not mistaken but didn’t Alan Keyes run for president and isn’t he also black same for Al Sharpton so it has to be more than just Obama’s blackness.

By annonymouse

March 14, 2008 2:26 PM | Link to this

It boils down to this, like it or not. We all came from the same star dust and we all had the same ancestors.

By mr_xray

March 14, 2008 2:29 PM | Link to this

Brainwashed.

By fred

March 14, 2008 2:33 PM | Link to this

Obama’s wonderful message: HOPE and CHANGE. All you sheep are going to need all the HOPE you can get when the Dems CHANGE taxes. Do you people ever do any research on your own? You think the economy and job losses are bad now, just wait when the dems raise taxes. The economy will spiral down with no hope of stopping and you dems will be the ones without jobs. When taxes go up on corporations/companies, what do you think is going to happen? As the cost of goods (taxes) goes up, corps/cos. will have to lay off employees. Who do you think they are going to let go? Thats right - you. Be very careful what you think you are voting for. The grass is nNOT always greener on the other side.

By Tim

March 14, 2008 2:35 PM | Link to this

I keep hearing that Obama represents change. I like the sound of that, but I don’t base my vote on sounds. What I don’t hear from anyone is what change he represents. I have heard no valid reason to vote for him - besides Oprah’s blaring endorsement and I rarely listen to anything coming from her mouth. I work everyday with people from all walks of life and I ask why they are voting for or supporting a particular candidate, regardless of whether that candidate is republican or democrat. I want to be as educated and informed as possible. However with Obama, the answer I get most is his race. I don’t doubt he has credentials and accomplishments, but no one I’ve met who supports him can tell me any of them. I personally would be offended if someone told me I should vote for a particular candidate because he was the white guy. It’s sad to me that others don’t feel the same.

By annonymouse

March 14, 2008 2:38 PM | Link to this

mr_xray, brainwashed??

How about racist on your part? Again, we all had the same ancestors. Read up!

By cory

March 14, 2008 2:40 PM | Link to this

Investigate Obama and see his stance on the issues. Please tell me step by step how Mccain will bring about everything in his campaign those that question what change Barack will bring about. If you think Clinton or Mccain is a better candidate vote for them and leave it at that.

By Good News

March 14, 2008 2:52 PM | Link to this

Tim at 2:35. Yes, there will be change. You see, for years, no matter what the Congress or Bush Administration has done, we’ve been hearing the same thing, “It’s all Clinton’s fault!” And NOW, we have change. We hear a fresh voice, new blood saying, “It’s all….” Oops. Never mind. My b.

By Freestyle

March 14, 2008 2:58 PM | Link to this

I don’t think that Obama is simply ahead because of his race. Last I checked, he was black in the beginning when Hillary was projected by polls as the inevitable candidate and he is still black now (I know his mother was white, but most Americans aren’t sophisticated enough to differentiate). If race was why he was winning, then wouldn’t that have been a factor from the beginning?

I love how Ferraro says that Obama is only ahead in this race because he is black. In a single sentence, she completely discounts the entirety of his intellectual and political accomplishments, his impressive oratory skills, and his charisma. Ferraro’s message seems to be that blacks are naturally inferior so whenever they make it then it must be the result of white people “giving them a chance”. Frankly, I don’t buy that. Its time for America to move beyond these unsophisticated, gross simplifications. We, as a nation, need to grow up.

By Hell.in.a.Handbasket

March 14, 2008 3:06 PM | Link to this

In light of Obama’s aide, confidant and spiritual advisor’s comments Ferraro’s are very tame. Although what she said was wrong to say as it is politcally in correct I hear no one calling for Obama to ask Rev. Wright to abstain from helping in his campaign. The thing is with Obama after hearing the racist, anti-semitic, anti-american poisonous hate that Rev. Wright spewed Obama did not leave the church, he spent 20+yrs there, giving to the church and in return the church giving to him, along with Farrakhan. I wonder why the media is handling this situation with Rev. Wright and Obama with kid gloves? Why are they not pursuing Obama and Wright with the same aggressive indignation they have Hillary. You can bet that if it came out that Hillary or McCain went to a white supremacist church for 20 + yrs they would be toast, their careers ruined, their lives over. I originally support Obama and very much wanted him to be our next prez, but with a little research into his voting practices and looking into the links to his life and beliefs I soon realized this man was a very sly, fox. Quiet demeanor, never mean spirited but the veil is being lifted and we are seeing him for who he really is…a racist who hates America and blames this nation for all the ills that blacks have either been made to endure or brought on themselves. The idiocy of Rev. Wright concerning AIDS, 9/11 and other such nonsense is stattering and to think that the man who wants to lead this nation follows a man like Wright is just plain scary. Thankfully, the truth always comes out in the end and this time it came out before Obama got into office.

By Why be afraid of the truth

March 14, 2008 3:11 PM | Link to this

Mrs. Ferraro FIRST said that SHE would NOT have been the vice-presidential candidate if she was NOT female.

the truth is the truth. Alleging racism is quite ignorant. Mr. Obama is where he is because he stands out from the others BECAUSE of his race. He is a black man and his message is of “change”. All the political candidates spew that out every election cycle. The fact that he is SUCCESSFUL as a black man in a presidential race is certainly hope of change for the future - regardless of which party one supports. That makes him stand out from the rest. He is not only advocating change, his candidacy IS CHANGE!

Let’s not keep beating up on Mrs. Ferraro. She put her own candidacy for vice-president in perspective first.

By Robert F

March 14, 2008 3:11 PM | Link to this

I am a white male and I will be voting for Obama because I like him. He is an inteligent and worthy candidate. But it is just being honest to say that his race helped alot to get him his candidacy. While I am sure there are some people who will not vote for him because he is black, there are alot more who will vote for him soley because he is.

By CG

March 14, 2008 3:12 PM | Link to this

K,

Barack made the “I don’t know who I’m running against” comment not to diminish Hillary’s candidacy but as a statement to admonish former President Clinton’s underhanded tactics and comments made throughout the period of time leading up to the SC primary. Learn how to read between the lines and make inferences before posting.

By Raj

March 14, 2008 3:14 PM | Link to this

Obama just promise that he is going to deliver. McCain has already done that. He is a war hero. He is a leader. And he does not believe in cheap talk. Obama hasn’t done a thing in his life, worth reporting. All he can do is parrot his missionary sermons. He should go and do some work in Senate or elsewhere first, before he tries to become a President. Americans must be dumb to be taken in by a man, who has as of today nothing to his credit.

By Ron M

March 14, 2008 3:31 PM | Link to this

If Mr. Gingrich were honest he would have said that what Ferraro said was commonly accepted as true but not provable. He claims to be an academic but is still just an unsuccessful politician

My retort to Mr Gingrich is where would Mrs Clinton be if Obama were a woman. My answer is more than 300 delegates behind Obama and still fighting for the nomination to which she feels entitled but to which she is not deserving.

By mr_xray

March 14, 2008 3:36 PM | Link to this

Obama is a freshman senator. He has very few political accomplishments and little experience. Since his credentials are so poor and he has so little experience — he doesn’t inspire me nor do I feel confident he can do the job as president. And, probably due to the teachings of his infamous pastor Jeremiah A. Wright Jr., a known anti-US radical, his wife has only recently become “a proud American”. (I really don’t want t see her as First Lady.)

I think he has gotten this far because he has come under little scrutiny. Some voters are not interested in his lack of credentials or lack of experience – they are impressed only with his BS and other “non-qualifying” things. I know when I go on a job interview, I clearly present my credentials and experience and clearly demonstrate how they match the position I’m interviewing for. I don’t see Obama doing the same thing. I see BS and him pulling the “race” card to hide his inexperience and divert scrutiny.

I say – if he gets in – our country will be in peril for generations to come. He will weaken our nation more than other lefties have done and we will grow to regret it.

By YMO

March 14, 2008 3:38 PM | Link to this

So basically Newt is saying the Barack Obama’s white mother (who passed) would not have been proud of him? or his white supporters around the world are not proud of him…we are only infatuated with his blackness?

Black people only vote for Black people? So why don’t we do a count of white and black people holding seats in political office today and see which race outweighs the other? Geraldine Ferraro and New Gingrich is delusional if they think they can sum up ALL of Barack Obama’s life long career accomplishments by saying it is only because he is successful because he is black. COME ON WE ALL KNOW THAT IS JUST A FLAT OUT LIE.

People need to wake up to the fact that historically black people have not come out in droves to vote for black candidates because we are MUCH harder and tougher on our own black race than any other. Black people don’t want a black politician who says what he thinks we want to hear or someone who is there because of affirmative action. Black people don’t want to elect any black candidate into office that will do something very, very wrong. Because when ONE black person makes a mistake ALL black people are judged for it. When one (or hundreds of thousands) of white people make a inhumane very public tragic mistake (slavery, poll-tax, segregation, equal rights, etc) that one individual person is held accountable and everyone else takes a pass. Meanwhile the entire white race benefits from it while everyone else suffers.

Can someone please explain that logic to me?

This is not about a ‘race card’ this is about the truth. America (unfortunately) is a hate filled, racist country. It is not just one race hating the other. It is many, many races tragically hating each other for the sins of our forefathers and for today’s society which just wants to turn a blind eye instead of addressing the blatant racism in jobs, housing, education, equal rights in general. This contest for Presidency is reminding everyone in a very media heightened way exactly how racist they really are. And the truth hurts.

Why are we not discussing the fact that Hillary Clinton is a white woman who would not be able to run for office if it wasn’t for who she was married to? Hillary’s experience amounts to 8 years in the white house and a couple of over seas visits where she did a song and dance show with Sinbad the comedian for the troops, A SPEECH in Northern Ireland (she did NOTHING else), and most recently 6 years as a NY Senator (has done NOTHING) in NYC. Because racist people would rather vote for a white inexperienced woman, before they vote for a qualified black man. Who said racism was dead?

THE MORE THINGS CHANGE…THE MORE THEY STAY THE SAME HUH?

By John

March 14, 2008 3:40 PM | Link to this

Just as someone gains votes for fitting a certain demographic they lose votes for the same reason, it is a two edged sword.

Nice earlier post on using marines as waiters on Clinton. That is such an important issue, no wonder the Repubs are lost. Bill balanced the budget and gave us a surplus. The conservatives run amuck spending money (Reagan, Bush I and II), how is that a conservative value? Funny how the preach the debt culture “just go to Disney World”. LMAO….

By Lisa

March 14, 2008 3:41 PM | Link to this

If this is not about race, why then the majority of African Americans are voting for Obama, even if they would rather vote for Hillary? And why all the media reports what percentage of black voters voted for Obama, and what percentage of white voters voted for Hillary? Obama needs to earn the vote of all well informed voters, not just the “follow the crowd” voters, and not be ashamed of his last name, which nobody can say it because they get so defensive about it, and stop threatening to boycot if he doesn’t win, he’s a very good MOTIVATIONAL SPEAKER, but very secretive on his personal relationships with his pastor and Rezko, and the media should stop being so obviously biased and get some professional reporters not commentators that want to force their opinions on us. Of course I support HILLARY! HILLARY!

By question

March 14, 2008 3:42 PM | Link to this

Obama is half African and half American. Does that make him African American? African Americans trace their ancestory back to U.S. slavery. As in those in servitude not those who bought, sold, and otherwise profitted by it. Obama cannot so trace his ancestry to that. Perhaps he is just an American African or even an American, yes? A Kanzerian? Why is he considered black? Why not white? Because he has no white skin and blue eyes? Because he married a black woman? What’s up with that?

By gttim

March 14, 2008 3:43 PM | Link to this

“Oh…Linda…do you think Obama checked the “white” box on his application to Harvard?”

If your grades and SAT are good enough, you don’t have to worry about what box you checked. It is only those with borderline grades who are hoping they are lucky enough to get in that need to worry about what box they checked. Make outstanding grades and you get to go where you want. Make borderline grades and you had better start praying or hoping. When white males, who have had an unfair advantage for the entire history of our country, start whining about life being unfair to them, I just think about what wussies they are, and that they should study and work a little bit harder. Unless you are are the son of a rich white man who is a legacy and part of the government. Then, like “W,” you can go to a good school with crappy grades.

By tnmann

March 14, 2008 3:48 PM | Link to this

All people of all races & cultures have a tendency to initially identify more with someone of a similiar background whether their white, black, female, Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, Catholic, Protestant, Greek, Turkish, French, etc. Afterwards they make their decision based on the person not the background.

By Frankie

March 14, 2008 3:49 PM | Link to this

What experience at being a presdident did GOVERNOR BUSH, REAGAN and BUSH have before becoming president. NONE…. What experience does a 1st time head coach have before becoming a head coach….NONE… SO all this crap about experience just does not wash. If McCain has so much experience, why hasn’t he bee nominated earlier in his HEROIC life. And where has this experience been in resolving the problems in this country. What has McCain done in his career other than ride his Vietnam Veteran status throughout his career. WHen does he plan to go out a help all of his sick Vietnam commrades who walk the streets every day and noght out of their mind begging for money from us non-HEROS.

Ferrero is a flake and should have been quieted long ago, why would you want a women who did nothing with her campaign on your team…I guess the experience of loosing…GO Hillary keep Ferrero in your camp ..You will just hand OBAMA the nomination… OBAMA ‘08

By Terrell

March 14, 2008 3:51 PM | Link to this

IT HURTS ME TO SEE THAT THE WORLD HAS NOT GOTTEN PASS THE COLOR OF ONE SKIN INSTEAD OF THE CONTENT OF THERE CHARACTER. I AM BLACK FEMALE THAT LOVE CLINTON BUT I LIKE THE FEW OF OBAMA. WHAT BOTHER ME IS ALL OF THESE YEARS THERE’S NEVER BEEN A BLACK MAN THAT I FELT WAS QUALIFY UNTIL NOW. I HAVE NO PROBLEM VOTING FOR A WHITE MAN ALL OF THESE YEARS, AS WELL AS OTHER BLACKS, BUT THE WORLD DOESN’T SEE THAT. SO MY QUESTION IS, IF OBAMA WAS THE BEST CANDIDATE, WHY PEOPLE WON’T ACKNOWLEDGE THAT, BECAUSE IT’S ALL ABOUT HIS COLOR. I KNOW BUSH WON’T HAVE GOTTEN INTO HIS PLACE IF IT WASN’T FOR HIS FATHER, SO WHY MAKE THE COMMENT THAT OBAMA ONLY GOT IT BECAUSE OF HIS COLOR. WE ARE IN A WORLD OF INTER-RACIAL MARRIAGE. RACISM WILL ALWAY BE HERE AND THAT’S ASHAME.WHENEVER BLACKS ARE VOTING FOR SOMEONE BLACK IT’S BECAUSE OF THIS COLOR. THIS MAN HAS CHARACTER. DO THE WORLD EVER LOOK AT THE FACT THAT WE SEE SOMETHING YOU GUYS DON’T BECAUSE YOU ARE LOOKING AT THE COLOR? COME ON AND FOR ONCE THE WORLD NEED TO ACT LIKE HUMAN BEING. BLACK FOLKS HAS NO PROBLEM FOR FOR WHITES, WE’VE HAVE DONE IT FOR YEARS, SO WHAT IS REALLY THE PROBLEM NOW.

By Paul Arbitelle

March 14, 2008 3:53 PM | Link to this

In my opinion i see nothing wrong with anyone voicing their personal veiws regrading any subject matter.I believe it’s one of our rights(or am i incorrect?)Of course there are always those that want to dramatize certain issue’s and can not accept if it offends them in any degree,but we all must realize the facts that,there always has been,always will be differences in opinons,and to try to surpress is not going to solve a thing.

By jeronimo

March 14, 2008 3:58 PM | Link to this

What’s all this fuss about Ferraro’s comment. Obama is fortunate that he is black or he would not get the vote of 83-92% of the African-American vote of the black communities across America. Ferraro’s comment came after Obama got 92% of the black votes in Mississippi. Hillary is likewise fortunate but she could never get even 55% of the women’s vote.

By through

March 14, 2008 4:02 PM | Link to this

If you get the chance look at the Houston Press article written by a man who knew Obama when he was starting out. A black powerbroker made the statement to another that he was going to “make me a senator” and he redirected all the legislation which had been being pushed for years by other legislators as to being placed by Obama. This was just as the Dems took control, and it appears that Obama got about 20 bills through in that one year of work. He is not a self made man. He owes favors. His favors are not to main stream poor. You must realize this. If he were smart, before it all gets blown out, he would be the olive branch, take the vp and have a real chance as a QUALIFIED candidate in 8 years. The Dems could have a good chance at 16 years with Clinton and then Obama, but I’m afraid we will get another 4 years of Rep. because people voting Obama don’t really know doodly.

By A Dallas Mom

March 14, 2008 4:02 PM | Link to this

America is in transition and I’ll be glad when we get through this phase. I am a Mom who supports Obama, because he is a beautiful human being and I am raising my kids to be beautiful human beings. I also support Generation Obama—the young Americans who are beyond the racialized ways of thinking, talking and categorizing I wish more of my own generation and older generations would move past. I’m with the young people. They get it right, because they’ve learned from our mistakes, as well as from any wisdom we’ve managed to pass on.

By lee

March 14, 2008 4:05 PM | Link to this

No one seems to be savy enough to realize Obama’s candidacy was promoted by a powerful bloc who wanted to defeat Hillary Clinton and knew she would lose the black vote only if a black candidate were offered. Too bad his supporters did not care that the Democratic party would be thrown into turmoil because of it. I am a Clinton supporter because I believe she is the most qualified candidate but I am disappointed that Geraldine’s statement was not defended because, inspite of Gingerich, it was the truth. Obama may be offering change but his chances of making any are very remote and talk of change is not always for the better if there is no real substance behind it.

By Pete Thorogood

March 14, 2008 4:11 PM | Link to this

“Curiously, she didn’t say anything, on EITHER occasion, about prominent female candidates rising to their position and gaining support because of their GENDER.”

YES SHE DID! She has admitted that she became the VP candidate because she was a woman.

By GodHatesTrash

March 14, 2008 4:15 PM | Link to this

If Geraldine Ferraro had gotten to be VP, it would have been like having Edie Soprano a heartbeat away from the Presidency.

She’s trash, Italian style.

By minneapplebird

March 14, 2008 4:16 PM | Link to this

…and Hillary would not be where she is today if she was not married to Bill Clinton…and McCain would not be where he is without Vietnam…and Mondale would have won the election if Geraldine Ferarro had not been his running mate. It’s always something.

FOR THE RECORD: I am a white 45 year old woman, I don’t watch Oprah, and I support Obama. So what’s my problem?

By fred

March 14, 2008 4:17 PM | Link to this

Frankie,

Do a little (won’t take much) research before posting please. Bush, Reagan and Bush all had EXPERIENCE running a government. Two were governors and one the VP. Historically, Governors have been elected because of their experience running basically a microcosim of the US gov’t. Each STATE is very similar to the Federal Gov’t, hence the EXPERIENCE. This election will be the first in a long time where the 2 candidates will be Senators, and Senators have NO experience running anything except committees. God help us all.

By GodHatesTrash

March 14, 2008 4:17 PM | Link to this

Ferraro’s mouth proves that Italian-Americans can be just as stupid as Georgia rednecks.

Trash.

By Nick

March 14, 2008 4:18 PM | Link to this

I think maybe white Christians should be the only people feeling comfortable about voting for Obama. He doesn’t get defensive and demand an apology if you mention he’s half white and his mother is a Christian. But mention he’s half black or that his dad was a Muslim and his camp goes into full swing demanding an apology for the “insult.” And he now refers to his pastor as a kind of weird uncle who embarrasses you at family gatherings. Yeah, it’s not white people who have to worry about where his sympathies lie.

By question

March 14, 2008 4:22 PM | Link to this

People mistake the black voter percentages for that representing the proportion of America’s total black population. On the contrary, of the 35 million or so blacks in this country, a minority are registered voters. Of those registered voters who are black, a minority actually vote. Of those blacks who actually vote a minority are Republicans. Of the majority of Democratic black voters who actually vote, a minority are polled upon exiting the vote centers. Of those polled, a minority respond. Of those who respond a majority support Obama. From such a sampling, how can any educated person say that Obama gets “…the vote of 83-92% of the Africa-American vote” and “…Obama got 92% of the black votes in Mississippi”(jeronimo 3:58)?

By Ron M

March 14, 2008 4:27 PM | Link to this

Give some thought to your choice of candidates. In medical insurance Obama’s plan will insure anyone who wants to be insured. The only people who don’t want to be insured are those in the post college age who think they are healthy. The penalties for not being insured can be made as they were in Medicare Part D such that anyone having a sense of responsibility would choose to be insured even if they don’t need it immediately, just to gain access to it in the future. Those who fail to choose do so not because they are healthy but because they are irresponsible. They may or may not be healthy so the general health of the insurance pool will not be skewed by the ability to opt out. Thus Clinton’s and Obama’s plan are almost identical but Obama’s plan will appeal to libertarian Republicans and Clinton’s plan will be called socialist.

Bottom line, the more friends you have the more successful you’ll be. Obama’s plan appeals to a wider audience. It appeals to me who does not need the plan but who knows that his plan has a chance of lowering my insurance costs by cutting health care costs.

Obama is not an empty suit. He appeals to people like me who do not always vote Democratic. I suggest that Clinton supporters think about why the more educated and the higher earners favor Obama. One reason is their money will be spent more wisely.

Don’t assume that the progressive message is widely accepted in this country. It is going to have to be delivered by an excellent politician, someone like Raegen who moved the country to the right. Obama but not Clinton can persuade the country to the left. That is the difference politically between the two. That is the reason why change is more important than experience, even though it is not intuitive.

Just give this some thought. It has nothing to do with who you or I like, it has to do with who will be more influential once in office.

By 26 for Hillary

March 14, 2008 4:28 PM | Link to this

No one says anything about women gaining political ground because of their gender because it simply does not happen that way. Our culture has a double standard, and women have to work twice as hard to get half as far as a man in many arenas, including politics and the law (aka her specialties). A white man with Clinton’s years and record in public service would be having an easier time in this presidential primary. People can call her all kinds of derogatory terms based on her gender and no one blinks, but the same does not hold true for any minority other than women - we are a society of hypocrites. People can be as cynical as they want about how she’s only gotten so far because she’s married to Bill, but that is a laughably absurd and totally ignorant thing to believe. She has earned it, whether you like her or not.

By Gingrich is the voice of reason now?

March 14, 2008 4:31 PM | Link to this

Ferraro’s comments in relation to Obama now and Jesse Jackson 20 years ago only indicates her thinking that only Whites are eligible to be POTUS. Millions of Americans disagree with her.

By Talk Alot

March 14, 2008 4:31 PM | Link to this

The economy is going to hell and all Sean Hannity can talk about is Senator Obama’s pastor. I don’t agree with his pastor either.

It’s a diversion from the bad economy of the republicans. Gas, milk, food stuff and all are going crazy. Keep diverting the attention from the real issue Hannity. His lemming love the diversion.

By d

March 14, 2008 4:39 PM | Link to this

It boggles my mind how people pretend to put “intellectual” spins on things that clearly are not. Elections are popularity contests. It goes back to childhood. Homecoming queen, school/class presidents. Who looks good, who is known by all, who has the most money, who’s willing to spend money on parties, which clique or party you belong to, etc. Funny, that does sound a lot like American politics, doesn’t it? Mrs. Ferraro shouldn’t have said what she did outloud, given the nature of media and election spinning, she is entitled to her opinion which is NOT completely false. If anything, it’s also taken out of context. The truth of the matter is that this country is not color-blind or gender-blind. She knows why she was chosen as a VP running mate. We live in a country where Hollywood actors can be senators, governors, and PRESIDENT, so please spare the sanctimonious “oh, we look at the person” routine, because any psychologist, sociologist, anthropologist or 8 year old child will tell you what we see dictates what we gravitate to. How many people out there pick their spouses based SOLELY on personality? Bottom line, we have an Afican-American male running against a caucasian female who happen to have some pretty good issues to contest. Let’s focus on those for a change.

By shane

March 14, 2008 4:41 PM | Link to this

Gingrich says:”under other circumstances, what are the odds that oprah winfrey suggests obama to the entire country”.

Its “reasoning” like this that reminds me why i think newt is so stupid. First of all Newt, obama is not the first black candidate in history. AL sharpton, Jesse jackson, and alan keys are all black. I dont recall Oprah campaigning for AL sharpton or alan keys. Do you? Maybe she supports oabam for the same reason i do newt. Hes inspiring! If he was white with the same inspirational skills and charisma, why wouldnt she? Are you saying she only did it because hes black? Again al sharpton is black newt. Oprah didnt “suggest him to the country”.

By Copyright

March 14, 2008 4:41 PM | Link to this

Geraldine Ferraro DID say something about prominent female candidates rising to their position and gaining support because of their GENDER.

[“[I]n 1984 if my name was Gerard Ferraro instead of Geraldine Ferraro, I would have never been chosen as a vice presidential candidate”.] (http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/03/gerald-ferraro.html)

In this tight campaign, do you think Obama’s polling 2 to 1 against Clinton among blacks irrelevant? It is A factor, NOT the only factor. Though Obama might be the better candidate, Ferraro was largely right.

By Darla

March 14, 2008 4:44 PM | Link to this

I think that Ms Ferraro did have a valid point as well as Newt Gingrich. How are we as a nation not to notice or acknowledge that these 2 candidates are very different from those frontrunners of the past. It was at first seen as a positive movement in the Presidential race. However, people in the media and elsewhere have chosen to exploit this difference in a very negative way beginning with Bill Clinton’s EXTREMELY taken out of context quote about a “fairy tale”. That was the straw that started dividing black and white. Most people don’t even know that Bill was discussing his view of Iraq. It had nothing to do with Senator Obama as a person or even his campaign. I wish everyone would let these candidates run on their record and the issues!

By GAConservative007

March 14, 2008 4:45 PM | Link to this

White Liberals are Racist

By john raleigh

March 14, 2008 4:47 PM | Link to this

Well, you’re absolutely wrong. In the same interview where she talked about Obama she talked about how she herself had been picked as a democratic candidate for vice president BECAUSE she was a woman. She said, and I quote, “If my name had been Gerard Ferraro instead of Geralding, I would not have been the nominee for Vice President.” Your problem, like lots of ignorant people, is that you believe the one fraction of the truth which the media gives you in the headlines, and you don’t look further to find out the REST of the truth. So, now, you basically posted a lie about Ferraro. And you are not the only one to spread such a lie. I wonder…if you will ever have the decency to retract it and make up for it. Probably not. That’s what american politics have become, take one phrase out of context, give it the worst possible interpretation, and then attack the person who said it as if that is all they said. It stinks. And Obama’s advisors have been doing this routine in this campaign on a regular basis since New Hampshire…

By rstites

March 14, 2008 4:47 PM | Link to this

Right. Being black sure helped Jesse Jackson and Alan Keyes. But I agree that a white man named “Barrack Obama” wouldn’t have as good a chance. Being black may give Barrack a slight edge there.

And while were at it, Hillary’s presence in the race is strongly connected to an advantageous marriage rather than to innate ability. In the unlikely situation that she could have been elected to the Senate if Clinton had never been President, I strongly doubt she’d be in a position to run for President at this point. Or maybe she’s taking credit for Bill’s election — an equally unlikely arguement.

By Latessheea

March 14, 2008 4:49 PM | Link to this

These racists like Ferrarro trying to keep Obama from becoming president are making me really angry! The African-American brothers and sisters need to get together and protest all this racist treatment we get every day! When Obama wins, things will be different—-he’ll get a bunch of African-Americans in Washington running things instead of all these racist white people.

By Richard

March 14, 2008 4:52 PM | Link to this

One only has to think “John Edwards” to know that Ferraro is correct.

Oblahma is a media creation, like American Idol contestants - shiny new objects to increase ratings.

Substance is out - hype is in.

Oblahma is a con.

By effiong

March 14, 2008 4:53 PM | Link to this

The whole development is getting, as Newt said, quite silly. You cannot run a politically correct election campaign. Does it indicate that the esteemed senator is too sensitive or are his staff being subconsciously condescendingly towards the senator themselves? If he is this thin-skinned in the primaries, what happens in the general election if he is nominated or when he becomes president? As much as I admire the senator, I do not get the warm and fuzzy that he will be able to handle the pressure when it comes. Instead of trying so hard to portray his opponent in such negative light, he should be consulting her on pointers on how to weather the storms when they come, for the storms will definitely come unless he plans to acquiesce to every demand of the republicans.

By ReversethinkerMN

March 14, 2008 4:53 PM | Link to this

Ferraro’s remarks are beyond absurd for two simple reasons:

No one gave him a free ride. Americans know and appreciate that. Ferraro is frustrated that her “inevitable” candidate is getting a whipping. Gingrich wants to piggyback on the controversy.

Gingrich is entitled to

By Churchill

March 14, 2008 4:53 PM | Link to this

Looks like you libs are going to have one heckuva convention.

By Macky

March 14, 2008 4:54 PM | Link to this

Since when being black in America is an advantage.It never was and never will be.There is a general pathological dislike for black people by other races.We are only tolerated,and up to a point,just like the house slaves during slavery.Why pick on a paltry 10-15% of the American population and who they vote for,Geraldine?The issue is that the Dems.have become so accustomed to the”house slaves” toeing the line,that they can’t take the thought of them wanting to take over the house.McCain needs to start courting the black vote by dealing with just issues alone.Let us see what will happen.I for one will be voting for McCain if Billary is the nominee.Maybe we need to go back to the party of Lincoln.

By ghost of strom

March 14, 2008 4:55 PM | Link to this

you got it right “wOOt”. what if. mccain was trying to get out of the navy when he was shot down. the enemy had started shooting back. his father didn’t meet him when he returned and later committed suicide. he junked his wife and went for the budweiser $$$$$$$. how could a real american hero suck up to george bush.

By John

March 14, 2008 4:55 PM | Link to this

Obama supporters say they’ll riot and boycott if he doesn’t get the nomination.

These are the same people who claim there’s a racist motive behind every Hillary comment.

Please God - save us from Oblahma!

By wm

March 14, 2008 4:58 PM | Link to this

i can not believe what i hear from the average person regarding this election. You have to be a toatl idiot..not to believe that being a woman is helpful, being a minority is helpful, and being a long term politician is not helpful, in todays environemtn. Since when do we really believ that people vote for what is best for the country. the self center, selfish attitude of most americans is all about what is in it for me. Clinton is a joke, and has been, You do not get experience by being married to it! Secondly, her own values have been shown over and over again to change with the situation and wether or not she gets caught. Why do we continue to make excuses for her. Obama is not a “bad” person etc…just a very inexperienced person…you can not deny that in any way shape or form…it is fact. So, why do we think he would do well dealing with our supposed allies, enemies and those in between? he just needs more hands on experience. McCain…because he did serve we should hold that against him, because the current climate is against it…how soon we forget 911, Pearl Harbor and other treachery handed out to us. Again, the same sel serving selfish attitude. If you really think that there are people like North Korea that you can actually make a deal with…try reading…yes reading …its called history…the road is lined with demi gods and dictators that we tried to deal with. sometimes i am ashamed to be called an american, when i see the same rhetoric over and over and it all comes down tot the same things form many people…$$$$…and how do I get mine..the thought of serving, of doing something because its the right thing never seems to enter many peoples minds….wake up America, we are better thatn that , and need to start showing it in our actions.

By Copyright

March 14, 2008 4:58 PM | Link to this

Latessheea, don’t you mean Obama will get the best group of people REGARDLESS OF RACE in Washington to do the job? Perhaps you mean ALL THE AMERICAN PEOPLE need to get together. Otherwise, you’re just replacing one racism with another.

By Brian

March 14, 2008 4:58 PM | Link to this

Churchill- Are you Limbaugh’s alter ego? As it reads, it’s like you pulled it right out of where he pulls most of his garbage. From betwix his buttocks.

By BigNance

March 14, 2008 4:59 PM | Link to this

It is true Obama is a bi-racial. I dont think he denounces that. I do think that you are what you appear to be in this country. He appears as black as any other black person in this country. We then label him as african american. He embraces that as well but it is in no way a statement of his qualifications. The Clinton campaign has very stragegically added “color” to his otherwise colorless persona. By doing that they choose to prey on the sick racial divisiveness that has always been a part of this country. If they can make it so that he appears “Jesse Jackson” like and highlight the fact that more and more african americans will vote for him, the better off they will be and the worse off he will be. It puts a dent into that otherwise colorless presentation he has. Very smart. I for one am very proud that he is both black, white, bold, courageous enough to run and most of all QUALIFIED.. Do not be swayed and slicked by the deliberate actions of the clinton folks to muddy the waters. It may be enough to push her back into the race. Think about it. What better way to do it than to have that man defend his ethnicity at every turn. They are smart but I truly hope the american people can see through it all.

By Jman

March 14, 2008 5:02 PM | Link to this

Actually, Copyleft, Ferraro did say something about her own gender advantage in the same interview.

Don’t we want to insist on intellectual honesty in any debate? These posts, and the press coverage, and the campaign spin, is so often provincial, partisan, and intellectually dishonest. Most of you are smart enough to understand nuance and context, yet we see night after night after night people stand in front of the camera or write or post arguments that willfully ignore the salient points.

Its pathetic and demeaning to the person who misrepresents what they know in their heart was intended.

Grow up and be honest with yourselves and each other.

By Cool Beans

March 14, 2008 5:03 PM | Link to this

To bhagwan deol: You are indeed a moron. It’s people like you that is responsible for the dumbing down of America. Please leave this country and take that MENTAL illness you have with you!

By Narisha

March 14, 2008 5:03 PM | Link to this

Well said. I will also say that she loses votes among men because she is a woman.

At this point the Dems have two candidates one a woman and one an African-American Male. I believe the general feeling is that only a man can run the USA whether he is colored or not. I believe Americans are in love with the concept of change but not enough to envision a woman as their leader.

It’s a shame because I believe that Clinton is as strong and as smart and as valid a candidate as Obama and that she deserves a chance. I would vote for her.

By Tim

March 14, 2008 5:07 PM | Link to this

Is there any wonder why people are excited about Obama with choices like McCain and Clinton. At least I can listen to an Obama speech and think maybe just maybe he can make a difference. I am a white republican voting for Obama NOT because he is black but because he is not an idiot or a crook. Both political partys still do not get it. Americas wants change. Radical change.

By Kate

March 14, 2008 5:10 PM | Link to this

George:

What an ignorant and uneducated being you are. It sickened me even looking at the likes of your poor excuse for writing. A word of advice: before you start plopping letters on the keyboard about Islam, Senator Obama’s beliefs/disbeliefs, or anything else that you think you have a clue, go back to kindergarten and start with your “ABCs”. It’s pathetic wastes like you who put the American people at the heart of jokes from the rest of the world. Pathetic.

As for the rest of this nation, another word of advice: united we stand, divided we fall. That’s where our Democratic party is heading, and fast. Somehow or another, this party had better find a way to unite - and it’d be great if we can nominate a clean, honest, intelligent, decent man. The only nominee here who comes anywhere near close is the good Senator Obama - the other 2 are just spending taxpayers’ millions in dirt, hypocrisy and lies.

In summary: are we prepared for another 8 miserable years under Bush III, or will we make the smart choice this time, unify this party, and give Senator Obama his rightful place as Commander-In-Chief???

By wm

March 14, 2008 5:10 PM | Link to this

Same stuff coming across the wire…and we wonder why the rest of the world tries to take addvantage of us? This is what they see? No substance, no commitment, just noise….blah blah blah…the president s job is not for the politically inept or the dreamer…because everyday reality smaks you in the face…the world is not singing and dancing with a Coke….our [problems will be exacebated by those that see this infighting as an opportunity and a weakness… while the current economic woes attract our attention, there is another part of the world where the agenda is the samee and has not varied, and we will have to deal with wether we want to or not. I hope that whomever gets elected, is pragmatic, realistic, tough and able to do the right thing…everytime…if that is McCain…fine…If that is Obama fine….but history has shown me that unless you work well with the systme…the system will work you…and we will all suffer from that lack of experience.

By michael o

March 14, 2008 5:12 PM | Link to this

Ain’t it really stupid that ppl cant see racism is two sided,when someone is white and says something and u call the person racist do u pause to think if u would do the same if a black person said the same thing,a black comedian said something silly about Obama on “the daily show” and nobody has said a thing about it,but once a white man says anything abt Obama u term it racist.wake up

By Wm

March 14, 2008 5:14 PM | Link to this

Please do not add to the pain of the american people by voting for Clinton..how much embarassment do we need…wasn’t the antics of her husband enough…which she has obviously condoned…there is no price to high for Hillary when it comes to power…look at her lifes history. Why is it that people are continually swayed by her when the facts are so obvious?

By John

March 14, 2008 5:18 PM | Link to this

Why not do something really radical, let’s look at the records of Sen. Clinton and Obama and McCain and examine the number and the quality and comprehensiveness of their votes since they have each been in office? I have seen the records of Sen. Obama vs Clinton and I am satisfied to vote for Senator Obama

By Truth Teller

March 14, 2008 5:18 PM | Link to this

Ferraro is an idiot, period. Gingrich is a fillander. The news media is filled with idiots as well.

One has to wonder why is it such a big deal that blacks are voting for Senator Obama. In every Presidential election blacks have voted 100% for white candidates. No one mad a big deal of that. Senator Obama hasn’t gotten close to getting 100% of the black vote.

Now that a black man is a viable candidate running for POTUS its suddenly considered racist for black people to support him? Following that ignorant logic - all whites are racist for voting for white candidates. That’s as ignorant as Ferraro’s comment.

As a people we have faced a lot of problems in this country from the moment we were brought here. My father and his brothers fought in WWII for this country and they were not even considered equal to their white counterparts.

People the question should be what is wrong with the black men and women who are supporting Senator Clinton and Senator McCain. If black people can’t get behind ONE viable black candidate then what are we saying to our young children? Are we condemning them to mediocracy or worst - a life of poverty because they dare not work hard to achieve in life.

One thing I know is if Senator Obama was white the DNC would have forced Senator Clinton out of the race by now.

By Rowanna Darkwolf

March 14, 2008 5:20 PM | Link to this

We all know America needs a change, thus McSame isn’t really a viable option. The fact is that both Hilary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama have extensive and commendable histories of public service. Both are well educated and very capable of leading us to the sort of change we need. Both are ABSOLUTELY ELECTABLE based on their experience. Thus, our job as voters is to examine their records, ignoring the hype and propaganda from the opposing camps. We have to examine and research them, their politics past, and their visions of the future and cast our vote accordingly. Do your homework and vote according to the dictates of your conscience, but for God’s sakes, do it according to the REAL issues, not this hype that the media is continuing to perpetuate. Who cares what Ferraro, Reverend Wright, or Gengrich said? They’re not the ones we need to examine. Let’s stick to the real issues and make educated choices.

By Socialist Sally

March 14, 2008 5:21 PM | Link to this

America the great is no more. Americans are ignorant. Both of your political parties have become asylum’s for retarded logic.

By wm

March 14, 2008 5:26 PM | Link to this

Truth Teller:

What is it you are saying,,that blacks should all get behind Obama?…why?…do youu expect him to do something differrnt or special for blacks then the others…wouldn’t that be hippocritical…is he not supposed to be the president for everyone…you need to get overt the black thing and start thinking about the american thing…I agree history was not always fair, but you can not keep reliving it…I did not add to those issues, so frankly, I relaly do not want somone constantly telling me how bad it is and what everyone else has done to make it hard for them…there are many exam0les of people of all nationalities and race that have been succesful and accepted in this country….you need to move on…

By Cool Beans

March 14, 2008 5:30 PM | Link to this

To Bianka: You are another MORON. Please crawl back under the rock from wince you came!

By Wm

March 14, 2008 5:30 PM | Link to this

Socialist sally…just the name says it all,…there isn’t a true,completely “socialist” state that was ever successful, or didn’t end up becomming a virtual dictatorship…or are you another that likes to rewrite history

By Cool Beans1

March 14, 2008 5:41 PM | Link to this

To mr_xray: You are truly an idiot!

It’s people like you that are responsible for tearing this country apart. Please go back in the sewer you came from so PROUD AMERICANS will have an opportunity to pull this country together!

By cybergal

March 14, 2008 5:43 PM | Link to this

What a shame we can’t be color and gender blind. When that finally happens, we can truly say “All men (and women) are created equal.” Today, however, in this earthly world we live in, that is unfortuately not the case. though it is getting better with each new generation.
The press does a great job of bringing to our attention mis-guided comments of the candidates and their supporters. Aren’t they (the press) guilty of stirring the proverbial “racist/feminism” pot? It seems they prefer to make the news rather than report it.

By lou

March 14, 2008 6:01 PM | Link to this

Wether Feraros comment was true or not it lacked respect. so does all that negative campaigning by hillary. You shouldn’t belittle a mans accomplishments who may someday very well be our next president.International eyes are watching but who cares, we’re the mighty americans right. bedsides had it been true obama would have been finished long ago just like jesse jackson and sharpton were. Lets be honest with ourselves, hillarys push to be president is nothing but a feminist movement squared. winning the white house would be the sweetest redemption from her husbands past naughtiness and her disdain for men. boy i wish a could be that fly on the wall when they’re having dinner. Never in the history of politics has anyone been able to move young minds like obama. Remember young minds don’t think like age ones. Gingrich is out of place to support her comments after seeing the uproar it caused. Next time be original Mr Gingrich you’re a little late sir. We don’t expect you to shift your dogma sir because we understand the inherent obstinance of an aged mind. I know this first hand and i’m sure glad i trained my dog as a puppy now that he’s 9. The real issue here is not enough testosterone and to much viagra in our society. Cialis already perceived that judging by their frequent commercials on cnn and fox news. have a good evening ladies and gentlmen.

By kenni

March 14, 2008 6:03 PM | Link to this

I WONDER WHAT THE FUSS IS ALL ABOUT,THERE IS ALWAYS GOING TO RACISM,WHEN A BLACK MAN IS VYING FOR THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE U.S.A.

By Eddie

March 14, 2008 6:19 PM | Link to this

Mr. Obama’s attraction is that he is DIFFERENT. Most people (with perhaps the exception of politicians) are sick of career politicians nesting within parties that seem to care about America’s future and more about the future of “The Party.” All it takes is a bright, thought-filled, individualist person with a vision - regardless of race or gender - who can share that vision, in order to attract the American people. You know … the qualifications of a LEADER!

By Churchill

March 14, 2008 6:24 PM | Link to this

Yes kenni, but it is coming from a bunch of self-righteous, white libs. Barry Obama is being beat up by the white liberal establishment. Its O.K. for him to be her Veep? She is a monster. Hillary doesn’t care who or what party she has to destroy get power. She likes the black vote, when it votes for her. But let it stray of the Democrat “Plantation” and all bets are off. African Americans in this country have been victimized by the elite libs. Our side has been saying that for years. Peace.

By GAConservative007

March 14, 2008 6:28 PM | Link to this

White Liberals are Racist

By Ed

March 14, 2008 7:06 PM | Link to this

Everyone should get a grip! Of course race and gender are going to be discussed. For crying out loud…we have the first truly credible African American and the first truly credible female running for the highest office in the world. Do you really expect that race and gender are not going to be discussed?

And for all you folks out there who are so upset about Ferraro’s, Bill Clinton’s or anyone else’s comments about Barack or his candidacy better take a look at how women are thought of and treated in all cultures represented here in the United States, particularly in the black culture where music is demeaning to women, film and literature are demeaning to women, and the men are demeaning to women. What’s the saying I’m looking for here….hmmm. the pot calling the kettle black, or some such thing. Have you seen the gender bias? Any woman alive has.

All men are not sexist and all white people are not racist. It would help everyone to discontinue with the stereotypical cliches.

By GAConservative007

March 14, 2008 7:26 PM | Link to this

All White Liberal are Racist, Ed.

By I

March 14, 2008 7:36 PM | Link to this

OK OBAMA, SO WHY ARE YOU SO INSULTED ABOUT BEING A BLACK MAN, SURELY YOU WOULD NEVER BE A WOMAN, NEVER WOULD YOU EVER BE A WHITE MAN THAT’S FOR SURE, ARE YOU TOO ASHAMED OF BEING BLACK? WHAT’S THE DEAL HERE? ARE YOU JUST CRYING SO YOU CAN LOOK GOOD? ADMIT IT, YOU ARE A BLACK PERSON THAT OPRAH IS PAYING HIS WAY TO THE WHITE HOUSE.. QUIT MAKING THIS A RACE ISSUE.

By martian

March 14, 2008 7:46 PM | Link to this

humaniods please stop hating each other over color, race, religion. You can keep football and bbq.

By JANE

March 14, 2008 7:49 PM | Link to this

I AGREE WITH I’S COMMENT OBAMA DOES NOT WANT TO BE BLACK.. OPRAH IS HIDING GIVING HIM A JET AND A BLANK CHECK. OBAMA OBAMA SHOW US YOUR TAXES AND TELL US WHERE YOUR MONEY IS REALLY COMING FROM. AND DON’T BE ASHAMED OF BEING A BLACK MAN, DID’T YO MAMA TELL WHAT YOU ARE? JUST A BLACK MAN.

By rerun

March 14, 2008 7:53 PM | Link to this

churchswill, if your mamma wasn’t so pasty white and slow after the black bronzed alonzo crawled off her good and worked her sloppy hole you wouldn’t be here you worthless white poodle terd

By white russian

March 14, 2008 7:57 PM | Link to this

comrades, who cares if the mayor gets a hooker? Or if weirdo repubs want diddle each other what’s the harm live a little maybe its how they show luv

By George Thomas

March 14, 2008 8:05 PM | Link to this

What is wrong with Ms Ferraro’s comment? This primary is all about race. The media just doesn’t want to call it that way probably because they don’t want to be labelled discriminatory or worse, bigots! But look at the black votes, 80-93% of them votes Sen Obama and ask them if they are voting for him because of his knowledge or his ‘hope’ message. No, they are voting for him because he is one of them. He is their candidate who can represent them and make them and their race proud. The white vote is a whole different story. If you offend them, make a derogatory comment, or become a political liability, you will be drop in an instant. Ask the pastor that Sen McCain dropped from his campaign. I agree with former Speaker Gingrich, she doesn’t need to apologize for telling the truth.

By James

March 14, 2008 8:06 PM | Link to this

Obama could be a good cult leader because of the fact that he has supporters that are so loyal to him that no matter what he does or how bad it is, his supporters are blind to it and try to explain it away. Will it take Obama coming out and calling white people crackers and telling them to go to hell before they realize what this man is about. Of course not, they will explain that away too. His supporters would say (He didn’t mean that, he was just showing some humor). But when Bill, Hillary and Geraldine state facts about Obama, they are labeled racist by Obama supporters, black people and the media.

By anonnymouse

March 14, 2008 8:25 PM | Link to this

Quote: “But look at the black votes, 80-93% of them votes Sen Obama and ask them if they are voting for him because of his knowledge or his ‘hope’ message. No, they are voting for him because he is one of them.”“

The black vote in Texas is 17%, but Obama carried Texas with the most delegates. Yes, he did, no matter what the media doesn’t say.

Guess that sort of negates your theory, hmmm?

By kevin

March 14, 2008 8:38 PM | Link to this

Obama and his campaign talk about race when anything comes up they don’t like and media goes along with it in general not to sound racist as obama’s campaign points out.

Why is it racist if any one use Senator Obama middle name . Is he ashamed of his middle name or his roots that his father was a Muslim ? Does he think American people to be so narrow minded ?

Same goes for obama campaign complaining about his photo in kenyan dress and painting it racist with the media going along .

How is he supposed to unite people and improve America’s image in the world when he finds it racist to shown seen in dress of another country. What does it portray about him and the American people that they are so narrow minded and is an insult to the nation whose dress he wore.

How come it is fine if other Presidents in the past have done those dresses and felt proud.

God help Americans and America with Obama

By Lisa

March 14, 2008 8:42 PM | Link to this

Obama is “distancing” himself from his Pastor only now, when it’s all over the news, but according to him he has NEVER been in attendance when all this sermons were said! ( he’s been a member of this church for over 20 years) Now he’s saying he only received “spiritual” guidance and NOT political guidance from this pastor! THAT is just so scary! this is so militant, What is the real agenda here? I just hope that the CHANGE, HOPE he’s been preaching all this time to his followers is not something we will all be sorry for if he does become president, his whole campaign has been based on his JUDGMENT, and not experience, well I think he needs more, much more experience so he can have a sense and JUDGMENT to see and know that this pastor has been preaching and influencing his congregation, even if they’re not “present” when he’s preaching so much hate for our country, if the pastor is so unhappy in this country the door is open for him to go anywhere in the world. I feel that Mr. Obama is not being truthful to us and is just doing the will of some of his sponsors, and that’s too bad, he should keep being a motivational speaker, maybe even open his own church so if he really means what he’s been saying all along, maybe he can correct all the damage done by people like his pastor that keep thinking that because of their history they’re entitled to everything, what ever happened to “I had a dream…”?

By deborah Liu

March 14, 2008 9:02 PM | Link to this

I agree with the remark of Ferraro about Obama. Obama has no any ability to be president but some people will be cheated by his shallow speeches. Black American has a victimized character. Any one talks about race and they are gotten offended. Obama is taking advantage of his race to stay till now even though he is the least qualified candidates in the entire race. The lady just told truth but Obama can not tolerant truth. He loves meaningless applauses. I believe that the media is terribly unfair toward Hillary, a true leader and a true hero. Obama can only give long and long and empty and empty speeches. More and more already realize that and already tired about that. I am very fortunate to figure that out in the very beginning. I believe that the best career for Obam a is to be a preacher not anything else. I am very disappointed that telling truth causes this lady resign. Fortunately Obama will not be nominated. The longer he stays in the stage, the bigger damage to him and the more embarrassment he will receive. He absolutely has no any qualification as president. He should celebrate his luck privately as US senator. Any achievement as a State senator and US senator? Zero. Can American people afford a president without capability to do some thing? Absolutely not, particularly in this economy and in all those challenges.

By anonnymouse

March 14, 2008 9:16 PM | Link to this

Quote: “Any achievement as a State senator and US senator? Zero. Can American people afford a president without capability to do some thing? Absolutely not, particularly in this economy and in all those challenges.”

Hmmm, read up on his bills and Hillary’s and then come back and say the same thing. He has outdistanced Hillary by a long shot.

By D'Angelo

March 14, 2008 9:18 PM | Link to this

Anybody but Hillary

By glcjr

March 14, 2008 9:29 PM | Link to this

CHANGE from Obama? CHANGE for CHANGE sake? I think not. Hitler was for change. Mugabe was for change. Obama knows nothing and is a flash in the pan rhetorical artist with no plan, no brains and certainly no conscience. Maybe he should be asking his racist ‘pastor’ for advice? But that would mean he would be listening and not just on the church roll to try to smooth over his anti-God beliefs with the American voters.

By Paisan

March 14, 2008 9:30 PM | Link to this

I agree with the Ferraro’s comments…the reason he is where he is, is that he’s black. If truth be known, he would have been nominated by now if he were white.

By annonymouse

March 14, 2008 9:47 PM | Link to this

Black?? How stupid of you. I think not. According to the US Census, he is “mixed race”.

By bronx

March 14, 2008 9:52 PM | Link to this

I can’t believe how stupid some whites really believe blacks are. News flash. the only reason most blacks are suffering now is because of whites & that includes Obama.

The Idea that a black man is doing good because hes black is absolutely ludicrous and I’m going to give you 5 good reasons why.

1st. There are more whites in america. (according to the government)

2nd. A study released by a Washington think tank shows that in the last two decades, state spending on corrections grew at 6 times the rate of state spending on higher education. In addition, by the close of the millennium, there were nearly a third more African American men in prison and jail than in universities or colleges. The study, titled “Cellblocks or Classrooms? The Funding of Higher Education and Corrections and Its Impact on African-American Men,” was conducted by the Justice Policy Institute (JPI). According to the study, between 1985 and 2000, the increase in state spending on corrections was nearly double that of the increase to higher education ($20 billion versus $10.7 billion), and the total increase in spending on higher education by states was 24 percent, compared with 166 percent for corrections. The study also reports that in 2000, there were an estimated 791,600 African American men in prison and jail, and 603,000 in higher education. A stunning proportion of black men in the United States  will not be able to vote in the November elections because they have been convicted of a felony, according to a new report released by Human Rights Watch and The Sentencing Project.   In seven states, a staggering one in four black men is permanently disenfranchised. In two states, Alabama and Florida, the ratio is one in three.  If current trends continue, in a dozen states as many as 30-40% of the next generation of black men will permanently lose the right to vote.

Almost every state in the U.S. denies prisoners the right to vote.  But fourteen states bar criminal offenders from voting even after they have finished their sentences. In these states, over one million ex-offenders are permanently disenfranchised. 

Any felony can trigger disenfranchisement.  A  first-time young offender who pleads guilty to a single drug sale and is placed on probation can lose the right to vote for a lifetime.

Mind you this all happened on Bill Clinton’s watch & that he also increased jail terms for drug possession, creating a situation where one in nine black men between the age of 20 and 35 is now in prison at any given time. Obama, by contrast, was arguing for the full decriminalization of marijuana as recently as 2004, and has refused to indulge in this deranged tough-on-crime escalation.

The idea that Clinton was “the first black president” was always implicitly racist: so screwing around, riffing well in speeches and liking fried chicken makes you black now? In fact, Bill Clinton was prepared to lash black people whenever it was politically convenient, with the quiescence of Hillary. Just after receiving the Democratic nomination for president, Governor Clinton returned to Arkansas to authorize the execution of a black man, Ricky Ray Rector, who was so profoundly mentally disabled that he told the guards to keep his last meal so he could have it tomorrow.

Attacking blacks when an election neared became a habit: in 1996, Clinton signed a package of welfare reform that effectively abolished benefits for poor women after a two-year time limit. They are disproportionately black — and as a recession hits now, they will suffer severely.

Of course you have to make compromises to achieve power. But at some point, on some issues, you have to say no, I can’t. I can’t execute this mentally disabled black guy. I can’t plunge millions of kids into poverty, I cant allow person with a history like Geraldine Ferraro stir up the Issue of race to help me win an election and I can’t still insist I was right to back the war in Iraq, when it has killed more than 650,000 Iraqis. The Clintons don’t have that gagging reflex.

3rd. Of the blacks who do vote many are not allowed to cast their votes due to a lack of voting machines in predominately black districts.

4th. lets not forget that Al Sharpton ran for the presidency in the last election and did terribly.

5th. Americans have not had a black president to date. “Oh yeah” being black really helps. (thats sarcasm)

American history is heavily propagandized. It tends to make heroes of anyone who did things that helped the country and doesn’t mention their flaws. The fact is that the country was extremely racist from its founding until a very short time ago, and even the early politicians who are seen as pioneers in civil rights were very prejudiced by today’s standards. Had they expressed a genuine belief in equality they never would’ve been in office, and had to keep this in mind when debating/writing legislation/etc.

Imagine if a major politician said this in a debate today

“I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races. I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will ever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. … And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race.” - Abraham Lincoln, 1858.

For some reason you don’t see too many of these quotes in history textbooks but none the less This continues to be the mindset of many.

Time for change! Obama 2008

By annonymouse

March 14, 2008 9:52 PM | Link to this

Quote: ” If truth be known, he would have been nominated by now if he were white.”

Really, Hillary is white and she hasn’t been nominated by now. There goes your logic.

By D'Angelo

March 14, 2008 10:18 PM | Link to this

HILLARY IS A MONSTER

By Ubong Ambrose, Ottawa

March 14, 2008 10:24 PM | Link to this

There is no racial divide. I think Clinton’s camp is just bringing up this racial issue in their bid to get the white americans not to vote for Obama who is obviously gaining acceptance of majority of americans people. Clinton’s team know the truth: americans want a change and they are eager for real change. They understand that getting Hillary and Bill Clinton back to the Whitehouse is nothing but a recycling of old stuffs.

What we are seeing is politics of selfishness. If it is a matter of gender revolution in the American presidential bidding, Hillary and Bill should have picked, support and sponsor a woman who has never tasted the Whitehouse (presidency). It is all selfishness veiled in “woman president.” The world is watching America. The ungodly selfishness in her candidacy is evident in her speeches. She even prefers the Republican John MaCain to win the general election if she is not on the Democratic ticket. She complains about everything that Barack is doing well and whatever favours her is the best way for America. You can even read the biasness in her face.

I do not think and I do not believe that America, the world power has suddenly become devoid of fresh, seasoned, smart and intelligent individuals with contemporary leadership qualities to begin a recycling of old ones.

Americans can tell history to their children, there are documentaries about yesterdays on papers, CDs, DVD and tapes. They can be found in stores, libraries and the mall. If we are standing for change, let’s stand for real change! The change Americans need today is the real change. Doing otherwise is nothing but trying to live the future in the past. It is trying to make Americans to live history rather than allow them make their own history.

By GAConservative007

March 14, 2008 11:00 PM | Link to this

The Clinton’s bring it up because race is divisive. Wake Up, Ubong. The Clinton’s and most white liberals are racist.

By Phrank

March 14, 2008 11:09 PM | Link to this

If Obama’s father had been Barry O-Hara from County Cork (born in sight of the Blarney Stone) and everything else had been identical, Billy Sheehan would have brought in Manchester for him in the NH primary. Hillary would have been history 6 weeks ago.

By Bronx

March 14, 2008 11:13 PM | Link to this

glcjr No brains? None of the candidates as well as our current or past presidents academic achievements come even close.

Barack Obama is a magna cum laude graduate of Harvard Law School & was the President of the prestigious Harvard Law Review. Those are phenomenal accomplishments for anyone of any age, race, or sex. His academic achievements, alone, should clearly show his excellent qualification for anything he pursues. A brilliant, diplomatic President of the United States – what a concept.

By D'Angelo akaTI ATL

March 14, 2008 11:15 PM | Link to this

White liberals want to steal the Presidency from the first “Clean and Articulate” African American candidate.

By Churchill

March 14, 2008 11:18 PM | Link to this

Look what Howard Dean has done to the Democrat Party!!!! The man is a political Jedi!!!

By Gilbert James

March 14, 2008 11:41 PM | Link to this

The fact that Barack Obama is campaigning successfully on a platform of social unification is sufficient to convince us of his distance and opposition to any idea of racial divisiveness being promoted by an ex-pastor of his church or anyone else who chooses in this free democratic country to support him politically. Let us not distract him by these asides. America needs Obama’s skillful and sincere diplomatic approach and his leadership and motivating capability to unite the country and regain its respect and appreciation in the international community. These qualities which he so well displays will certainly be a tremendous asset to his presidency in enabling him to muster the best of human resources required for moving the country out of its present social, economic, and foreign relations crises.

By Herewegoagain

March 14, 2008 11:45 PM | Link to this

How in the world do you say that if Obama was a white man that he would not be in “this” position? What “this” position of running for President of the United States? Excuse me but did I miss something? Hellooo but ALL past U.S. Presidents are WHITE. This argument is ridiculous. Obama has done just as much if not more service to help people from the grass roots level to Congress than any of presidential candidate. He is in “this” position because of what he has accomplished. And the American public believes that he is the best person who can put this Country back on track and start to make it better. Point blank. The American public is tired of this grade school foolishness. And it amazes me how no one asks the public, when two white men are running against each other, do you feel that another white man can do a good job as President? No they don’t. So why all of a sudden because a black man is running for President and has a great chance of winning, is the American public’s decision making abilities called into question? If you don’t question our decision when two white men are running for President, don’t question it now. Believe me. We understand how this whole election process works.

By Gov.H.Dean

March 14, 2008 11:50 PM | Link to this

ArrrgggHHHHHHHHHH!!

By Tanisha

March 14, 2008 11:54 PM | Link to this

YO Bronx, well Hillary was married to William “BJ” Clinton. So what you got, yo? Harvard is fo uppity white folk. Fosheezy.

By Jocko

March 15, 2008 12:31 AM | Link to this

I truly thought racism was almost dead in the US until the Clintons came back into the scene. I have no problem in voting for Obama or MCCain or any of the other previous candidates but I am sorry those of you supporting the Clinton Trifecta are simply poor judges of the truth. I plan to collect a list of Clintonista email addresses and specifically target them with lucrative spam campaigns that appeal to everyone as generically as a horoscope or a Nastrodamos profecy.

Forbes Billionaires list here I come.

By Reggie

March 15, 2008 12:47 AM | Link to this

Did I hear that correctly? Its an advantage to be Black in America?

By IP on the GOP

March 15, 2008 12:58 AM | Link to this

The volume of ignorant, uninformed comments on here is staggering. Both Barack and Hillarty were viewed as future political stars by their peers when in college, and both compiled impressive accomplishments by their mid-20s. Look it up if you don’t believe me.

Ferraro’s clumsy and frustrated comment about Obama has a slight basis in accuracy. Being black helped get him his slot as keynote speaker for Kerry at the ‘04 convention. But it was the quality of his speech and his strong connection to the public that made him a viable Presidential candidate. Being black is also an asset with the knee-jerk liberal media, who would rather kill themselves before saying anything that could remotely be construed as racist.

Unfortunately for Obama, he’s about to get buried by his pastor and Rev. Farrakhan. The Sean Hannitys and Neal Boortzes of the world are going to hammer this issue for all it’s worth, and Obama is going to be lucky so to survive.

Fortunately for those of us who recognize that this country can’t stand the prospect of another Republican President (even one with some honor and a semblance of a clue), if Obama is taken down before the Democratic convention by the right wing attack machine, the Republicans are going to get what they wanted in the first place: a third shot at the Clintons.

The result will be the same as the first 2 (4 counting Hillary’s wins in NY). The R’s will throw tons of manure at the Clintons, and they’ll shovel it right back, only more effectively. It will be a source of great amusement to listen to the pitiful bleatings of Hannity, Boortz, Limbaugh, Beck, et. al., for the next 4/8 years, as they try to convince their lemming listeners how awful things are with Hillary in the White House.

By Monisha

March 15, 2008 1:02 AM | Link to this

What’s the deal about that old hag ferraro—-Obama’s going to beat the clintons regardless of what she says. The clintons are old news—-it’s time for an african american to run things in this country, to correct a lot of the racial problems that exist and create a lot more opportunities for people of color, especially african americans, who deserve the most.

By D'Angelo

March 15, 2008 1:24 AM | Link to this

Anybody But Hillary

By Bill Clinton

March 15, 2008 1:37 AM | Link to this

Where all the fat white interns at? I’m not interested in sexual relations just f****** and various acrobatics with my Cuban cigars.

By Bill Clintone

March 15, 2008 1:39 AM | Link to this

Where all the fat white interns at? I’m not interested in sexual relations just f******. and various acrobatics with my Cubans.

By TanishaPlaya#9

March 15, 2008 1:42 AM | Link to this

Obama is a P.I.M.P YO. Hil betta chil. Obama is the sheeze.

By Bj clinton

March 15, 2008 1:45 AM | Link to this

Yall I’m Hornay and tired of wagging my finger at the press. Cant ya just kinda put me up in there so I can get busy doin what I do, you know politics

By D'Angelol

March 15, 2008 2:30 AM | Link to this

Only Bill can save Hillary now. Only the “First, Black President” can save her. Sen. Hillary Rotten Clinton should put Bill back in front. The first “Black President, accused of Racial agitation in SC this cycle, can surely put the party back together. Right? One brotha to anotha? Bill vs. Barack. That is what this is all about!!

By Lawrence C. F*

March 15, 2008 4:37 AM | Link to this

Bill is not the first black president, but he does know how to use black people and we are just dumb enough to follow him.

By Gulf War Vet

March 15, 2008 5:08 AM | Link to this

Geraldine Ferraro is entitled to her opinion and she is right.

Blacks are voting for Barack Obama along racial lines and not because he is probably the most articulate and smartest candidate running for President.

I’m a die hard conservative Southern Republican and on a personal basis , I actually like Barack Obama. I wouldn’t vote for him , Senator John McCain has my vote locked up already.

The fact of the matter is , 80.1 percent of the Country is white while blacks make up 12.8 percent of the population. Do the math , people.

14.8 percent is Hispanic and is also the fastest growing minority in America (THAT WOULD BE ME).

The backlash is , America is still deeply divided along racial lines and nothing that the Democrats or liberal press can do in the coming months will change that fact.

It’s not right , I strongly disagree with it , Blacks and whites alike should not think this way but slavery , the Civil War and the civil rights movement , have all shaped the collective history and mindset of America.

The Democratic party is deeply flawed , even more so the the Republicans. We desperately need a strong third political party that can break the gridlock in Washington.

So , in summation. Unless Hillary can swallow her enormous ego along with her vicious temper and accept the vice-president position , the Democrats are doomed.

By bob

March 15, 2008 5:51 AM | Link to this

She said the same thing about herself when running for VP with Mondale. She was right all Three times.

By Roderick

March 15, 2008 6:33 AM | Link to this

Black Folks rest assure - the blue evils are not ready for a black man running this country.

By meme

March 15, 2008 6:57 AM | Link to this

More reasons why I hate Gingrich…

By Will in Lawrenceville

March 15, 2008 7:57 AM | Link to this

I feel sad when I read comments from people who can’t see that Sen. Obama is where he is in this election NOT because of his RACE but because of the Failed Policies of the GREAT DECEIVER, George Bush.This country and the American People deserved better.We are seeing the results giving the Keys to drive the Greatest Country in the world to a Self Serving Spoiled Rich Kid Who’s only real success in life has been being born into the right FAMILY.

By Troothsayer

March 15, 2008 8:02 AM | Link to this

“I’s votin’for Obama cause he’s black” is a refrain heard throughout black america. I almost made the same mistake voting for a presidential candidate just cause he was from Georgia. I made the right choice but too many people did not and he became one of the worst presidents in history.

So let me get this straight, I should vote for Hillary because I am a heterosexual…..I should vote for Pat Robertson because I believe in God………how about Vince Dooley cause I like the Bulldogs?…….It’s all prepostorous and completely reinforces the belief that blacks vote for either one of their own or whomever they are told to vote for by one of their “professional, career hate mongers.” There are many capable blacks who could lead well but are often branded Uncle Toms because they are literate, educated, and conservative in their thinking. What really kills me is that a lot of good black folks will vote against their views to support a candidate that has socialist viewpoints such as free healthcare or paying off their failed subprime mortgages instead of following their christian beliefs which are very well entrenched in their community.

Good luck, all. We surely have hell to pay.

By Ray

March 15, 2008 8:57 AM | Link to this

Lets set this race thing aside. I don’t give a tinker’s damn about Obama’s “struggle for racial identity” or his color. I want a president who rise above this petty rhetoric and fix the problems in this country, mainly our broken tax code, our dependence on the Arabs, an illegal immigrant problem which threatens to kill us and our health care system. I would vote for Donald Duck, just because he is duck, if he could fix our broken system.

By Sparkie

March 15, 2008 9:01 AM | Link to this

Such a dumb comment by a seemingly smart lady. (Ferraro). Andrew Jackson, Congressman John Lewis and presumably some other important black leaders were initially behind the Clinton campaign but have made the switch. I believe that some blacks were initially hesitant to nominate Obama for fear he would not be electable, or because they lacked experience. There are those who will no doubt vote for him because he is black. I don’t think this is necessarily a bad thing. I am white and originally planned on voting for Hillary because at the time I felt she was the stronger candidate. I just no longer believe that. Further, she has proven to me to be the underhanded person I have long suspected her to be through her campaign tactics and behavior. Obama has continued to impress me more and more and I will be happy to vote for him for President. Neither of them were my first choice as I felt them too mainstream and corporate influenced. I was more of a Kucinich and Edwards fan. But now that we are where we are, I think sending Obama to the White House will be a very good move for the country. I imagine it will help our image internationally, as well.

By ill bred

March 15, 2008 9:16 AM | Link to this

This campaign is not about race and neither Clinton nor McCain can make it so. The last time the race card was played successfully was in the OJ trial.

We’ve moved on for Obama 08. That’s the whole point of Obamamania.

By Cy Brown

March 15, 2008 9:17 AM | Link to this

Ferrarro and Gingrich are both right! I for one am sick and tired of all of this PC rubbish! Obama is SO unqualified that if her were white, he would have been eliminated from the race months ago. Americans had better lay off the crack pipe and wake up. If you think the country is in poor shape now, just wait until someone like Obama gets elected!

By Cy Brown

March 15, 2008 9:22 AM | Link to this

Sparkle: To your comment “I think sending Obama to the White House will be a very good move for the country. I imagine it will help our image internationally, as well.”

What kind of crack are you smoking? He’ll be good for the country only if you are Muslim. We are at war with radical Islam, people! This is NOT a game that we can afford to take risks on someone like Barack Hussein Obama!

By Karen

March 15, 2008 9:30 AM | Link to this

Another thing. Obama is not where he is because he is black. One reason he is where he is because he has not allowed his race to be a limiting factor. Also, Obama is actually biracial. For one reason or another, that equals black. I have always found that an odd view adopted by both blacks and whites. In reading about his mother, one learns of her great influence on her son and his education. Maybe Ferarro should have said that he would not be where he is if not for his white mother. But, that would have been worse, no? Silly world. I do not give a rats patootie about the candidate’s ethnicity or gender. Trying to figure out who is best out of the mainstream choices we have been given. Again, for me it is Obama.

By Stan

March 15, 2008 9:48 AM | Link to this

Geraldine,comments were so stupid,if Barrack was a white man the Democratic nomination would have been over in January, You folks no that is the truth,this guy is Barrack is straight from central casting, you draw up the profile of what a presidential candidate should be brilliant,smart,quick on the uptake and handsome,that is why I am clueless on how in the hell could George Bush be president,If Barrack was a white man Hillary Clinton wouldn’t be on the campaign trail.She know that her ace in the hole is that she is running against a Black Man and she knows what buttons to push to scare you folks ,she loves the fact that Geraldine is pushing those buttons

By Midas

March 15, 2008 9:59 AM | Link to this

Is it not fun to watch the Democrat elite cat fight like high school girls on a float-building committee? And these are the people you poor liberal boobs think will lead us into the future. Don’t you recall that they wouldn’t let you on the committee? Time to grow up, kiddies.

By Brian

March 15, 2008 10:01 AM | Link to this

Years ago, Isaiah Thomas said Larry Bird would be “just another ballplayer” if he was black. Much like Geraldine Ferraro, it’s not the content of the statement, but the ugliness of it that counts. It’s just an ugly and unnecessary thing to say. Everybody knows Barack Obama is black. Everybody knows Hillary Clinton is female. Why not get over it and let them continue the campaign on their own merits and flaws, policies, and agendas?

Furthermore, Ferraro’s reaction that she is being labeled the villain unfairly or that someone other than her is twisting and uprooting the Democratic Party come across as self-centered and hateful. It’s a grumpy old woman saying, “how dare you mock me for my opinions?” When in fact her opinions are outdated at best and racist at worst. Geraldine needs to shut her mouth and let the storm she created pass.

And Hillary… Hillary needs to categorically reject and denounce anybody who tries to make this a campaign about racism.

People who like Barack Obama like Barack Obama because he is personable and genuine, and because he represents a new way of doing things in Washington. Does race enter into it for some? WHO CARES?! It doesn’t and shouldn’t matter to the rest of us.

By Mark Johnson

March 15, 2008 10:04 AM | Link to this

Okay Demoncrats, it’s all about to come down on your head!

It’s okay to call Hillary by her middle name, but not the wonder boy? Barrack Hussein Obama is his name and we shouldn’t hide from that fact.

He is NOT African-American, but is a black American…but the Dems don’t like that term…..the idea that he is African-American is as big a lie as the others that he tells that gets a free pass….. see the link below to get the facts…. text to be linked

His father called himself Arab-American, why do you think he has that name?
He is often quoted as saying that he remembers as a child seeing a Life magazine cover where a man was trying to lighten his skin because he was black…well, the problem is, there never was such a cover……then he said it must have Ebony or Jet…..they couldn’t find it either. His ties to the racist pastor is what is going to be his downfall…..he calls him his mentor and his spiritual advisor…married Barry and Michelle, and has attended this church that pledges Allegiance to the mother country…why don’t you go back if you want that mother country so much? Who is holding you captive and in chains? The fact that his father’s family was involved in the slave trade is about to come out too…. Wake UP America Go McCain!

By JR

March 15, 2008 10:13 AM | Link to this

Do you really believe 92% of the African American community in SC, GA, AL or MS would support a white candidate who takes this position on gay rights?? If the candidate were white, would the black churches also be supporting him??

“That’s why I opposed DOMA in 2006 when I ran for the Senate. That’s why I am a strong supporter not of a weak version of civil unions, but of a strong version, in which the rights that are conferred at the federal level to persons who are part of the same sex union are compatible.

When it comes to federal rights, the over 1,100 rights that right now are not being given to same sex couples, I think that’s unacceptable, and as president of the United States, I am going to fight hard to make sure that those rights are available.”

Did Ferraro call it right?

By Change at what cost?

March 15, 2008 10:37 AM | Link to this

I keep hearing the word “change” over and over again. Obama keeps saying the word, but just saying the word doesn’t mean much. What is he planning to change? And has anyone accepting this pipe-dream of “change” stopped to think about the cost of such changes?

Universal Healthcare costs money, which will come out of our pockets…money that no one has right now. From a financial standpoint: we cannot afford a democratic president, because democrat means increased taxes. My family cannot afford to lose one dollar. I help this country by not being a burden to it.

And then the first thing a democratic president will do is bring our troops home. Which on a short term basis is good, but long term is disasterous. Our being in Iraq is wrong, yes. But it’s a catch-22. We cannot leave. It’s sad to think about, but we can’t now. Because as soon as we bring our troops home, Iraq is going to become the headquarters for Terrorists, and who do terrorists hate the most? Us. Do you think they are going to stay on their side of the world and let us live peacefully?

Pipe-dreams. Obama’s changes will cost us more than anyone can afford, our lives.

By Dr Morpheus

March 15, 2008 10:45 AM | Link to this

A good indicator that Ms. Ferraro’s comments inflamed racist sentiments among susceptible “white” voters may be found on David Duke’s web site where you may read his letter to Keith Olbermann strongly agreeing with Ms. Ferraro’s comments. If Duke isn’t a good barometer of white racism, tell me who is? Was the effect calculated by Ms. Ferraro and the Clinton camp? Judge for yourself.

http://www.davidduke.com/general/keith-olbermann-says-ferraro-sounds-like-david-duke_3576.html

BTW I am a 55 yr old, WASP male professional and lifelong Democratic voter

By Just Desserts

March 15, 2008 10:50 AM | Link to this

We are witnessing the result of the Balkanization of the Demonrat Party. Watch as the Clinton’s ramp up “ethnic cleansing” between now and the convention.

Hopefully when this is over African-Americans will finally abandoned the party that has kept them on the plantation for all these many years.

By anonnymouse

March 15, 2008 11:00 AM | Link to this

Black, white, yellow, or red?
How stupid. What difference does it make. The black popularion of the US in 2006 was only 12.4% of the total population. And a lot of them are not eligible or won’t vote. If you are so dumb that you think the black vote will make a difference, GET OUT AND VOTE. It’s that simple.

By Assume The Position

March 15, 2008 11:01 AM | Link to this

The problem is that African Americans are not bowing before Queen Hillary and are not accepting that she deserves to be America’s Second Black President.

By tommyt

March 15, 2008 11:05 AM | Link to this

JohnX You wanted to know who listens to someone like Ferraro at this stage in her career? Are you serious? First of all, obviously you do. Secondly, did you notice that there has probably never been a blog on AJC with this many posts ever? That’s who.

By ja

March 15, 2008 11:13 AM | Link to this

The Obama campaign has highlighted the racism in this country. Do we really believe Obama getting 90% of the black vote is because of his qualifications. Hillary is getting only 65% of the white votes. Hmmm. Now who are the racist?

By Is It Just Me

March 15, 2008 11:17 AM | Link to this

Does it seem like no one likes Hillary….not even Hillary if the truth were known?

Is the MSM just so self-loathing about racism that they can’t bear to listen to what BrackO says, look at his record, and acknowledge that he is an empty suit?

If Ferraro, a long-term intimate to the Hillary Clinton, has to resign for telling the truth is it a forgone conclusion that BrackO is the next president?

Does it seem like Clinton’s are so desperate to pull out of a death spiral that they are sacrificing key players in order to bring attention to something everyone is afraid to say?

Is Ferraro just showing her true colors as history repeats itself?

Did I miss that there was going to be a battle between two anti-Christ’s or is this just an amazing coincidence?

I thoroughly enjoy the love-hate relationship between the Clintons and the Dems and watching everyone tip-toe around political correctness, seething all the while. It’s a beautiful thing!

By Is It Just Me

March 15, 2008 11:17 AM | Link to this

Does it seem like no one likes Hillary….not even Hillary if the truth were known?

Is the MSM just so self-loathing about racism that they can’t bear to listen to what BrackO says, look at his record, and acknowledge that he is an empty suit?

If Ferraro, a long-term intimate to the Hillary Clinton, has to resign for telling the truth is it a forgone conclusion that BrackO is the next president?

Does it seem like Clinton’s are so desperate to pull out of a death spiral that they are sacrificing key players in order to bring attention to something everyone is afraid to say?

Is Ferraro just showing her true colors as history repeats itself?

Did I miss that there was going to be a battle between two anti-Christ’s or is this just an amazing coincidence?

I thoroughly enjoy the love-hate relationship between the Clintons and the Dems and watching everyone tip-toe around political correctness, seething all the while. It’s a beautiful thing!

By Alan

March 15, 2008 11:58 AM | Link to this

I am sure Obama has gained many votes because he is black. However; for every vote he gained for being black he lost two for the same reason. Obama has done well despite his race, not because of it. Case closed.

By ill bred

March 15, 2008 12:05 PM | Link to this

Obamamania is real. Nothing can stop it. The race card is irrelevent, as you see this whole thing just blow over like every other spin Hillary throws out there against Obama.

There’s no stopping Obamamania.

It’s like Donovan, the singer from the sixties? He did lots of acid and smoked lots of dope and sang these groovy songs and there was just no stopping his rise to fame, know what I mean?

By Uncle Boris

March 15, 2008 12:12 PM | Link to this

Sven the Blog Catalyst is right on target! Watching the Demagogues and their growing appetite for cannibalizing each other is truly getting funner and funner to watch.

By ill bred

March 15, 2008 12:20 PM | Link to this

U R easily amused, Boris. I know where there’s some grass growing in Kansas about now, you may want to take your vacation there now and go look and have the time o’ your life.

Enjoy, little one.

By GAConservative007

March 15, 2008 12:31 PM | Link to this

WHITE LIBERALS ARE RACIST

By Churchill

March 15, 2008 1:38 PM | Link to this

I have to ask. Will you libs have great big ole riots in Denver when Hillary steals the nomination from Barack? It looks to me that the Democrat party is ripping itself apart over race. Affirmative action is a good thing, unless the minority challenges the white, liberal establishment. I would like to thank all of you libs for this wonderful chain of events. This is truly instructive.

By Churchill

March 15, 2008 2:24 PM | Link to this

Will you guys riot in Denver when Hillary steals the nomination?

By Lisa

March 15, 2008 3:38 PM | Link to this

For all of you talking about riots if your candidate of choice doesn’t get the nomination, tell me, what would be the diference between the people of the “third world” and you? where would the freedoms we’re so proud of be? where is democracy? and as your candidate keeps preaching, where is his JUDGMENT, that his followers will resort to riots, is THAT his message of CHANGE? CHANGE BY FORCE? and where is your CIVIC DUTY? and you are the ones that will take us to the new CHANGE, HOPE AND JUDGMENT with your votes? why don’t you demand from YOUR candidate to be honest about his pastor, Rezko, which now he’s saying his JUDGMENT was bad when it came to his dealing with him, but only after everything is coming out in the open and he’s being force to say something and stop being secretive and arrogant about all this. He doesn’t walk on water after all. But he gives good speeches, he should stay with that, maybe he can motivate his followers to be well informed and think of their civic duties.

By Churchill

March 15, 2008 4:08 PM | Link to this

There is no difference between libs and those in the third world, Lisa. The thought of the diversity seeking, peace loving, affirmative action supporting libs rioting over race at their convention, warms this conservative heart. You guys can’t blame Bush for any of this stuff either. Howard Dean and the DNC made the rules. If you guys cannot even select a candidate with out all of this mess, what in the world make you guys think you can run the country. Peace.

By TC

March 15, 2008 5:44 PM | Link to this

Former Speaker Gingrich is incredibly indulgent to a leading liberal in his remarks about Geraldine Ferraro. This war of gender and racial politics between supporters of Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama will likely benefit Hillary Clinton. The Clintons can count. In any case, it’s a test of leadership for Obama: http://acropolisreview.com/2008/03/barack-obama-condemns-reverend-jeremiah.html

By V Racer

March 15, 2008 5:52 PM | Link to this

There is an ugly “they deserve it” race war going on in the democrat party. Not a day goes by without a “racist” comment from a racist Clinton supporter and not a day goes by without a charge of “racism” from Obama’s racist supporters. Neither candidate is worthy to be president, democrats clearly point that out to us in very newspaper forum. Yet, the “he lied” liberal media brainwashed will vote for one or the other. Meanwhile, thoughful, discriminating, patriotic Americans who know we are in a fight against a vicious enemy for civilization as we know it, will vote for the man who understands something the others don’t, duty, honor, country.

By ill bred

March 16, 2008 8:31 AM | Link to this

It was a matter of time B4 the race card was played by someone. Early primaries give the race issue a chance to cool off so that voters will be immune by November.

Obama 08. We’ve got a country to change and a world 2 convince.

By Bronx

March 16, 2008 10:09 AM | Link to this

Pastor, Rezko is being blown way out of context. I’m not a church goer myself but i have been to various churches in my life and i can tell you that in each case I did not agree with the pastors.. So my opinion is that allot of you who are jumping on Obama’s pastor need to take a closer look at Hillary’s pastor (if any) as well. and while you’re at it also look at her choice of husband, Her aids & maybe even her dry cleaner. Are you beginning to see my point? there is no end to the madness once you start going after ones associates. whos to say Hillary’s pastor is not a child molesting pedophile? He/she could be But how would this affect Hillary’s judgment as the president unless she was a victim. Furthermore even as a victim the door swings both ways. she could take her experiences as a victim to help improve life for others who suffer the same fait, ignore it all together or (as sick as it sounds) maybe even encourage it. The bottom line is you don’t know.

By NOMORERACISM

March 16, 2008 1:30 PM | Link to this

Hillary is a Monster

By U

March 16, 2008 3:59 PM | Link to this

Bronx…GOD DOES NOT LIKE UGLY! OBAMA IS OSAMA BROTHER.

By U

March 16, 2008 3:59 PM | Link to this

Bronx…GOD DOES NOT LIKE UGLY! OBAMA IS OSAMA’S BROTHER.

By U

March 16, 2008 3:59 PM | Link to this

Bronx…GOD DOES NOT LIKE UGLY! OBAMA IS OSAMA’S BROTHER.

By Bronx

March 16, 2008 5:32 PM | Link to this

Are you actually expecting a response? Tell you what; don’t think of this as a response think of it as a tip.

Stupid is what stupid does & don’t get stuck on stupid. Learn it, live it.

By NOMORERACISM

March 16, 2008 5:47 PM | Link to this

Clinton supporters are racist scum. It is time for her to bow out.

By Warbler

March 16, 2008 11:10 PM | Link to this

Noting that Clinton is female is racist

By James Lewis

March 17, 2008 1:01 AM | Link to this

Obama chose the pastor as his spiritual mentor, and now, in the final hours, he wants to distance himself from the man because it is politically inconvenient.

How many votes would Obama have if he were white?

By Wackolibhack

March 17, 2008 4:57 PM | Link to this

It is Bush’s fault that white liberals hate black people. I hate BUsh