Poll: Racial misgivings of Dems an Obama issue

While disheartening, it demonstrates how extremely important the get out the vote effort will be to making sure Obama gets elected. If you've had ENOUGH of the last eight years, volunteer, donate and vote for Obama-Biden for the change we need!

Time to roll up our sleeves.......we got work to do!!

To whites: America's strength is in its diversity. Our diversity is what separates us from every other country that has ever existed. But we will never reach our full potential as a country, if our diversity, the very thing that makes us so strong, is the thing the you most fear.

To blacks: We've won the civil rights battle (for the most part). We HAVE overcome (to a large degree). We can go to any school, live in any neighborhood, fall in love with whomever we choose, interview for any job, and go and do and say anything that we want without the fear of unjust reprisal. But we will never, ever, EVER reach our potential as a people unit we lose our resentment toward others and our rebellious attitude toward society.

Its time for all of us to grow up.

Barack Obama isn't the boogeyman. Uninformed, easily-led, racially-motivated voters ARE.

Amen to that!

He wants Greek columns in the back ground at the DNC.

...

Your post lost all of its credibility right there, just to let you know.

This is a sad story, but not for all the reasons you might think.

I believe we are at the brink of crunch time in this election, and the race card , from both sides, is about to hit it's peak usage.

Liberals have begun their final push to shame whites, particularly disaffected white Democrats, into voting for Obama as a political duty.

The story above is VERY disingenuous in some of it's themes and assertions.

Only 70 percent of Democrats support Obama. The article assigns this disaffection mainly to underlying white racism. The article, and Associated Press cannot possibly be that naive or lacking in understanding of the history of this election season.

There has been a considerable amount of polling since June that has indicated that millions of Hillary Clinton supporters are not going to vote for Obama, not because of race, but rather because of what they perceive as a 'rigged', unfair primary process and their belief that Obama ran a dirty campaign, particularly benefiting from the assertion by his surrogates that the Clintons were racist. To this day Bill Clinton is said to harbor personal antagonism to Barack Obama and will until Obama makes a public specific acknowledgement or apology to the Clintons showing that he understands the Clintons were lied about during the campaign.

There remain many pro Clinton and anti Obama websites, even so close to the election now and months after the Dem primaries ended. The simple truth is , as I have said since last spring, millions of Democratic voters believe that the primary system in the Party was fatally flawed, and produced a very flawed candidate. Obama may not have even had the support of half the Democrats at the time the primaries finished. Much of his support was a result of the unfair, possibly rigged caucuses. The system of proportional allocation of the delegates was a joke. Obama benefited from up to a 95% black vote, in a race against someone who everyone acknowledged was very close to Obama in policy positions.

Now we have a large number of Democrats apparently balking at Obama, and pro Obama organizations like the Associated Press (today) and National Public Radio (yesterday) are ascribing this resistance to RACISM, instead of acknowledging that in serious addition to, or instead of, any racism in this, resistance to Obama may be occurring for other reasons.

And how on earth is Obama himself in the clear on this score. This man was a member of a racist church for 17 YEARS! Who knows how many people either won't vote for him for that reason, or use that as part of the reason in combination with other factors in rejecting Obama. We may never know the whole truth about this. Add onto this the fact that Obama really is an inexperienced, modestly accomplished politician on a national level, and the 'reasons' Obama may be coming up short with Democrats are multipying beyond the simple, harsh contention that it is all about white racism.

The water is muddied on this issue beyond anyone's ability to prove one way or the other.

I know from first hand experience, that beliefs are based on ones own personal experience, and often that experience is very limited and heavily affected by a particular geographical or regional home base. Unfortunately, the old adage that "what exists within ones heart is all that should be judged", (while true perhaps, is still always a biased opinion) unfortuneately it always takes time and effort to live out. The quantity and the quality of opportunity that will be offered to any individual; surely depends on a much faster, more streamlined assessment, with a far more superficial set of rules, including: but not limited to; ones accent, body type or fashion appearance, gender, financial status, religious beliefs, level of education and yes...even the color of ones skin (as judged by the eye-of-the-beholder)! All of these assessments of a persons external image, will contribute to the amount of opportunity that will be presented to them by those who already have the power to dole out opportunity. To believe anything different would be misleading about Human-nature and the Human experience. For billions of people around the globe and even here in the USA these facts about the judgements that will be made by those around us (as surrounding ones external appearance), are devastating realities that can cause to keep someone trapped in poverty against their will for a life time. No matter how hard we try to say things should be different, it still comes down to the same realities. Lack of insight is painful for all, but I think also, living now in the deep south as I do, it seems nothing matters but the economy. The motto seems to be here; "what can a relationship with you do for me and can it profit me in some way or another?" It is always "every man for himself!" The first thing anyone I meet down here wants to know is what church I attend.

I think he can turn this to his advantage if he directly address the problems in the black community. He has done this a bit. It's a fine line he needs to walk, but I think he can do it positively and be seen as calling on African-Americans to address some of the lingering problems in their own communities and families, while at the same time address lingering injustices. Only Nixon could go to China, right?

Pittsburg Dan, "Barack Obama isn't the boogeyman. Uninformed, easily-led, racially-motivated voters ARE. There will undoubtedly be people who cry "blacks are behind Barack 90 percent"...and to them I say...it's because Blacks are voting en-masse with self-interest...which candidate will make our nation a better America for THEM. "

And this is not a racist paragraph? What do you people want. Whites to pay all your bills for you so that you can just take and take. Personally I am tired of my tax dollars paying for welfare, subsidizeing 450,000 homes to people to lazy to work knowing they can't afford them, or to high and mighty to take low paying jobs because they feel its beneath them. Black or White!! Its time we got rid of these social programs and make Americans stand on thier own feet again.

What do you people want. Whites to pay all your bills for you

Yeah, no racial problems here.

To Obama's credit, I must say that I have never seen a presidential candidate go out of their way as he has in making sure most major racial/cultural representations are included and acknowledged in his campaign (i.e., the multilingual ads, signs that represent women, latins, jews, vetrans etc check out his website store...) for as long as I can remember...and I was really impressed with how he addressed the black protesters in Florida by "letting them speak/have their say," I don't think I have ever observed another president in history that I can remember anyway, give such respect and consideration to the people.

Being a female working in the criminal justice system, I would say the most important thing I have learned is to remain unbiased as the various racial tensions are high. Obama is handling himself most professionally, with calm and determination.

I wouldn't care if he were purple, he knows what he is doing and his leadership skills, as we have witnessed in this past week with the economic crisis and in how the two candidates would handle themselves, are impeccable and Americans should be proud to have such strength, optimism, and leadership (even in his excellent choice of a running mate) in both Barack Obama and Joe Biden.

Oh the Irony of those 1/3....

"Blacks are Lazy, Violent and cause their own problems" Yet, when a Black man stands up, works his butt off to rise to teh top of academia, becomes a successful politician and writer, and then runs for president, they don't want to vote for him because they see him as "Lazy" and if he fails at his run, then "it is his own fault that they did not vote for him"?

Behind my screen,
So you are saying Condi Rice and Colin Powell would make fine presidential candidates because of the color of their skin?

I agree that they would make fine presidential candidates. Regardless of skin color.

There are plently of people who won't vote for McCain - Palin because McCain is old or Palin is a women.

Obama even ran an ad pointing to McCain's age. Palin was asked questions that would never be asked of a male candidate. Your thoughts on that?

What questions was she asked that would never be asked of a male candidate?

What?

I have no idea where you even read those ideas (between the lines or not)

I was simply lamenting the fact that so many Democrats feel as they do and the Irony of such a position.

And I felt Powell should have ran against Clinton in '96 and I feel sad that he was forced into destroying his credibility for the moron-in-chief. As for Condi, I think her political savvy leaves much to be desired but she certainly has a lot more scruples than the rest of the Bush administration (that is not saying much though).

The trouble and opportunity with prejudice is that it's controlled by instinct. Every social mammal are programmed to hate those different from them. War and racial hatred can be seen in chimps and wolves just as in humans.

The opportunity is that bigots have a subconsious back door. They react to stimulus like beavers piling sticks on a speaker playing sounds of running water. The wonderful thing is they don't even know they are being influenced.

One way to take advantage of this is to make Obama appear stronger than their present alpha leader, McCain. Just as in any pack the allegiance of its members can be swayed if the alpha leader is bested by a challenger. The debates are then crucial. Obama must best McCain just as the challenger bests the old loin to take over the pride.

RHouston,
She was asked how she could raise a family including a baby with Down's and be an effective VP of the US. She was asked about her ability to parent because her daughter is pregnant. The list goes on.

Behind the Screen,
Thanks for clarifying. I must have read you wrong and I apologize for that.
The extreme liberal, whack-job left seems to have solid representation here. I misjudged you as one of them. Obviously, you are more sane than that. Again, my apologies for the jaded attack on your stance.

"You know, the bombs bursting in air and all. It should be swapped for something less parochial and less bellicose"

Then they proceeded to set of a massive fireworks display to symbolise what? A big grandiose pile of tripe IMHO

Lots of Republicans harbor prejudices, too, but the survey found they weren't voting against Obama because of his race. Most Republicans wouldn't vote for any Democrat for president — white, black or brown

Not true.

We Republicans supported Governor Richardson, Condoleeza, Rice, Secretary Powell, regardless of the race. It's just that Obama does not make the cut like the people that served and I mentioned above.

Even Hillary (in case that a Dem is President ) had a lot more to offer.

My posts in the past supports this coment.

It is so sad that there are Americans that vote against their own needs because they can't accept the color of his skin. As if Barack can help what color was born. His energy, his intelligence and his steel spine should be able to erase the white stereotypes of black people.

I live in a small rural city in Ohio and I hear these remarks. I often wonder how many of these folks have ever met a black person. I have heard people remark that they don't believe in mixing the races, once again I ask, can Barack help the color of his skin? Help the fact that his mom was white and his dad was black? I truly hope that ignorance doesn't win this election. It did win the 200 and 2004 elections.

BB-375952,

Please stop spreading lies like McCain/Palin and being so gullible. What you said is not true. Check out FactCheck.org:

Question: Did Obama say the National Anthem conveys a "war-like message" and should be swapped for something such as "I'd Like to Teach the World to Sing"?Is this e-mail valid?

"Hot on the heels of his explanation for why he no longer wears a flag pin, presidential candidate Senator Barack Obama was forced to explain why he doesn't follow protocol when the National Anthem is played. According to the United States Code, Title 36, Chapter 10, Sec. 171, During rendition of the national anthem when the flag is displayed, all present except those in uniform are expected to stand at attention facing the flag with the right hand over the heart. "As I've said about the flag pin, I don't want to be perceived as taking sides," Obama said. "There are a lot of people in the world to whom the American flag is a symbol of oppression. And the anthem it self conveys a war-like message. You know, the bombs bursting in air and all. It should be swapped for something less parochial and less bellicose. I like the song 'I'd Like to Teach the World to Sing.' If that were our anthem, then I might salute it."

Answer: No. That's false. The quote was one conservative writer's idea of a joke, which has been picked up and repeated as though it were true in a chain e-mail. This is a ridiculous example of how false stories are started, spread and, in many cases, believed.

It began with a column dated Oct. 27, 2007, on a Web site called the Arizona Conservative, which is written by John Semmens and clearly labeled as humor. His column, in fact, is called "Semi-News -- A Satirical Look at Recent News."

Nevertheless, his column on Obama has been copied and sent around in e-mails, masquerading as true stories. The reader who asked us about it said he received it from a conservative Republican coworker. The e-mail included a note calling Obama's candidacy "a joke."

In this case, the joke is the message falsely quoting Obama, and it's on whomever is gullible enough to believe it's true.

Footnote: For background on the "news" that Semmens was satirizing, see our Jan. 10 article, "Sliming Obama." Also, thanks to Snopes.com for tracking down the source of this latest e-mail falsehood.

-Brooks Jackson

Sources
Semmens, John. "Semi-News -- A Satirical Look at Recent News." Arizona Conservative (azconservative.org), 27 Oct. 2007.

Behind My Screen,

"Oh the Irony of those 1/3....

"Blacks are Lazy, Violent and cause their own problems" Yet, when a Black man stands up, works his butt off to rise to teh top of academia, becomes a successful politician and writer, and then runs for president, they don't want to vote for him because they see him as "Lazy" and if he fails at his run, then "it is his own fault that they did not vote for him"?"

Actually, you're not QUITE right.

According to the news just the other day the actual term that was used was: "Uppity."

Proud American,

Please read my post regarding:

Question: Did Obama say the National Anthem conveys a "war-like message" and should be swapped for something such as "I'd Like to Teach the World to Sing"?
Is this e-mail valid? Answer: No. It is False.

Senator Obama never said this. Everyone really needs to start doing their own research and find out the truth about things before posting it on here. Truth and facts really are important no matter what the McCain/Palin campaign and people blindly following them believe.

Pittsburgh Dan, you are right.

Regardless of race, we are in the same boat RIGHT NOW and the sooner we get our act together, the more chances we will survive this entire mess the GOP gave us.

radicals don't see or hear, they just want to fight their cause without regard. Whites and Blacks have built a great country. Greed, racism and for anyone to act like they can't get their ass kicked, is tearing it apart.

...Oh, and its been the challenging of old ideas that have turned this country into what it is. Image any of the former Presidents or notable people in our history going with the same old ideas.

I applaud Obama for trying because he hasn't said anything with hate in his heart but with progress and a new face for our country, THAT is what all great Presidents have done in the past. But people are afraid of change, because its not known how it will affect them.

It's seems like the only brave people left in our country are over in Iraq fighting a mindless war.

(shaking head)

Pat N,

I am a pragmatist, not an idealouge.

I find a lot of pragmatic ideas on the Left and a few on the right. The place where the rubber meets the road is how to implement those ideas. If you could classify me, I am a somewhere between a libertarian socialist and a libertarian capitalist. I feel personal freedoms are a higher precedence than economic freedoms, and I feel that economics need regulation to keep it healthy and free from corruption and indulgence (see the S&L failures, the Financial failures today, etc.).

For these reasons, I align much more with the Democrats and would go as far as despising the Republican party due to their attack on freedom over the past 8 years in their quest for perpetual majority.

Behind My Screen... Kudos to you my friend. Well said!!!

Behind the Screen...
'Despise' is a strong word. You state that personal freedoms are more important to you than economic freedoms. How can those personal freedoms be realized if individual economic freedoms are stifled?

Obama is proposing increased taxes on businesses that make more than $250,000 a year. That's your local pizzaria or used book store. The people who own these businesses will have to lay off the people that work for them. The larger companies will simply move to countries that are less restrictive, laying off thousands. If all of these working class americans are thrust into poverty, the personal frredoms they can pursue become sorely limited.

I'll agree there needs to be a balance. We need to get goverment out of our personal lives. But with that comes some realities that most Democrats won't like. (reduction of federal social programs, grants, etc.)

There's simply no way we'll be better off with Obama's current proposal of decreasing taxes on "95% of Americans" and increases in spending.

It took me five seconds to find out that the Obama "statement" about the anthem is patently false. I'll save you the time:

http://www.google.com/search?q=%E2%80%98I%E2%80%99d+Like+to+Teach+the+World+to+Sing.%E2%80%99+If+that+were+our+anthem%2C+then+I+might+salute+it.%E2%80%9D&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

Aren't you even a little curious when you read something stupid like that about a presidential candidate? Don't you wonder just for a second (or five) if it's true or not, especially before you repeat it? Do you really think you're helping the country you claim to love so much by passing along a lie to try to support your position as to whom you support?

sjbo659,

Pittsburg Dan, "Barack Obama isn't the boogeyman. Uninformed, easily-led, racially-motivated voters ARE. There will undoubtedly be people who cry "blacks are behind Barack 90 percent"...and to them I say...it's because Blacks are voting en-masse with self-interest...which candidate will make our nation a better America for THEM. "

And this is not a racist paragraph? What do you people want. Whites to pay all your bills for you so that you can just take and take. Personally I am tired of my tax dollars paying for welfare, subsidizeing 450,000 homes to people to lazy to work knowing they can't afford them, or to high and mighty to take low paying jobs because they feel its beneath them. Black or White!! Its time we got rid of these social programs and make Americans stand on thier own feet again.

This is the kind of statement that people a hundred years from now will shake their heads about, wondering how people living in 2008 could figure out how to feed themselves if they reasoned like this.

First, the paragraph you quoted was not a racial statement. PD was saying that blacks (for the first time ever) had the chance to vote for someone whom they feel at least understands the problems facing their community, although he is not "black enough" for some of them. He is NOT saying that because Obama would be the candidate for blacks, that he would be a bad candidate for whites. You jumped to that conclusion, which may be all the exercise you get.

While many people, black and white, see race as the biggest issue in this election, the real issue is class. John McCain (2008 version) represents the extremely wealthy, and his voting record shows that he votes in the interests of the corporate class of this country almost exclusively. Obama's career path has shown at least an interest in helping less fortunate people, and it stands to reason that he will govern in a manner that supports that interest.

When the Supreme Court is deciding, just for example, whether or not you have the right to sue a hospital that botched an amputation by taking the wrong limb (it's happened several times), the decision is not a racial one. It's a decision between the rights of the corporation that owns the hospital and the rights of the individual. Obama will appoint judges who will protect the individual, while McCain is firmly on the record saying that he thinks Roberts and Alito are the kind of judges he admires.

Pittsburgh Dan is bummed out that so many white people in the Democratic Party who are not wealthy will vote for McCain (or stay home), not caring that he will hurt them economically and in the courts. That they will allow their prejudices to overcome their own self-interest, and vote for the wrong candidate, one that may not even share their views on any issue.

By the way, while race is the issue this time, many of these "Democrats" have allowed the GOP to convince them to vote for George Bush twice, and look where that got them (and all of us). Gore was too "smart," Kerry was, "elitist," so they voted for a guy who got us in an endless war and allowed the financial markets to flip over on their heads.

It will provide very interesting study for the people who come long after us....if there are any.

Behind,
One more question for you...

My Personal Freedom ideals include:

1) My 16 year old can not go out and get an abortion, should she become pregnant, without my consent.

2) I want the freedom to start a small business and employ a small staff, all of us making enough money to live, without suffering the highest corporate tax in the world.

3) I want the freedom to teach my child ethical, moral and personal issues. Not the schools.

4) I want the freedom of security and safety to know that I'm not being followed on the interstate by someone who just smoked a joint and is higher than a kite.

5) I want the freedom guaranteed by the Constitution that I can own a gun. And the ammo that goes with it.

6) I want the freedom of knowing I can speak my mind and promote a conservative belief system, regardless of who it ticks off.

Do you support my personal freedoms?

Pat N,

I have a good question for you. Since America is not just for you, what type of leader, better yet what type of America, do you think we should have for you and the American who want's the exact opposite Freedoms as you?

You see. That's where the rubber meets the road.

John Russel, I agree, It is he who creates the smoke that is most likely to extinguish. Mr. Obama has brought the race issue to the front and center, which unfortunately for him his downfall. He told America that he didn't look like the others on the dollar bills He had a funny name and did you know that he is black. For the comments he made and for his association with a black radical church, his affiliations with known terrorists, his inability to come clean regarding his name, Barry Soetoro, Barak Obama, where he's from, citizenship in Indonesia, (which in Indonesia you could not hold dual citizenship before the year 2007), he's Christian then admits to his Muslim Faith, what are his true intentions "protect America by disarming America", makes those of us, that really research the candidates skepical that this man should be running for the office of pesident at all.

One Party,
See? Here's the problem with jumping into the middle of a conversation.
Had you read the whole conversation between Behind the Screen and I, you would have noticed that I was reponding to the fact that he said he supported 'Personal Freedoms' rather than 'Economic Freedoms'. I was asking him if he supported my 'personal freedoms'.

So no...you did not have a 'good' question for me. It was a silly one, actually.

Pat N,

Obama is proposing increased taxes on businesses that make more than $250,000 a year.

THat's not true. That's McCain and GOP hype. The TRUTH, and I hope you will hear me out, is that Obama wants to cut taxes for everyone.

All making 250k will go back to tax rate of Clinton era which is LESS than now. All middle class, who on avg. makes 50-60k, will pay taxes at a lesser rate. So no one is raising taxes.

Now the McCain and supporters (including media) likes to use "raise" taxes, which is false and also, they say Obama wants you to pay "higher" taxes.

Most Americans GOP and Dems, think its right for someone who make more money in the 200s of thousands range to pay more taxes than the avg. citizen. As you see, and you can look it up, not just go by what you hear, Obama will lower taxes across the board.

Not you per say, but sometimes I see people sticking to their party like it's a sport franchise. This deals with people lives, not just you, or me but all of us. For that I have listened to McCain fumble over himself and is more wrong than right, most of the time.

Obama has really good solutions for America. In today's time Bush economics don't work and McCain will continue in the same way.

So if anyone on this board is racist or racism plays a part in their decision, its going to hurt them as well. McCain wants to continue a 455 Trillion dollar war (shaking head). economy is bad enough

One Party,
(sigh...) your post is so convoluted, I don't even know where to start...

1) Obama claims he will reduce the taxes of 95% of Americans. Please explain to me how this is possible when only 70% of Americans currently pay federal taxes.

2) I was talking about corporate taxes. You seem to be on individual taxes. (I think. It's hard to tell by your post). If you own a pizzaria, and you make more than 250,000 a year, Obama promises to raise your corporate tax rate from the already astronomical 35% to a mind-boggling 39%.

3) Now...onto the individual tax front: Obama's proposal is for FAMILIES making more than $250,000.

Pat N,

Because he said he supports personal freedoms, why would he need to support yours? Your question to Behind the screen was misguided, in my opinion. BtS's beliefs doesn't mean he has to agree with yours, so my question was a different form of the same question you asked, but asking what type of America would you see for those who didn't agree.

You made a list of your personal freedoms so I asked you a question to get an idea of what your belief is and your stance based on the question.

I thought that's what this board is for, to comment on posts and trade ideas or view points.

It wasn't an attack and I'm sorry you feel that way. Obviously the question made you defensive, so I assume you won't answer.

One Party,
I was attempting to point out that it's unrealistic to support only 'Personal Freedoms' and consider 'Economic Freedoms' secondary. Without economic freedoms, personal freedoms are slim to none.

Also, personal freedoms are varied. It's uncharacteristic for someone who calls himself 'pragmatic' like Behind did, and then turn around and espouse 'idealist' opinions involving 'personal freedoms'.
Is he a pragmatist or an idealist?

Hopefully the reason for my defesiveness (frustration, actually) is clear now. The point I was making to Behind is exactly the point you were trying to make to me, but from the other side of the political spectrum. Yet you only seem to be seeing the issue from the left.

Pat,

Personal Freedom ends where you begin to trample on the rights of others.

1) My 16 year old can not go out and get an abortion, should she become pregnant, without my consent.

This is not a freedom for you. You want the state to impose a rule on everyone to make parenting easier for you/

2) I want the freedom to start a small business and employ a small staff, all of us making enough money to live, without suffering the highest corporate tax in the world.

You have the freedom to start a small business. It may come with consequences, since avoiding taxation is not a freedom. I do think tax law should be simplified and small business needs a special segment since many are neither a corporation nor individual.

3) I want the freedom to teach my child ethical, moral and personal issues. Not the schools.

You have that freedom. Again, it is not the state's responsibility to make parenting easy for you.

4) I want the freedom of security and safety to know that I'm not being followed on the interstate by someone who just smoked a joint and is higher than a kite.

Security is not a freedom. In fact, the desire for security is the antithesis of desire for freedom. Don't attempt to mix the two.

5) I want the freedom guaranteed by the Constitution that I can own a gun. And the ammo that goes with it.

You have that freedom.

6) I want the freedom of knowing I can speak my mind and promote a conservative belief system, regardless of who it ticks off.

you have that freedom.

So, other than a few misunderstandings of what freedom is and what freedom can and should provide you, you have everything you want.

Also, Pat,

No, I did not say I want no economic freedoms, I said I prioritize personal freedom above economic freedom. I also said that economic freedom, like personal freedom has limits in order to maintain a healthy economy.

one party, What Pat is saying is true, a corporate tax hike will only effect those of us in the lower and middle classes, we will experience a loss of employment, and higher prices on goods and services. Right now only 70 % of Americans actually pay taxes and the the rest pay none, so how can he claim to reduce taxes on 95% of Americans? He can't. By lowering the tax rate on corporations will keep the rate of inflation to a minimum. And right now with all the bail-outs (which shouldn't have happened) we cannot afford his tax plan.

behind,
you never answered my question...Nice (if lengthy) sidestep though.

Do you, or do you not support my personal freedoms?

One Party,

(sigh...) your post is so convoluted, I don't even know where to start...

Thanks, I'll do my best to not be.

1) Obama claims he will reduce the taxes of 95% of Americans. Please explain to me how this is possible when only 70% of Americans currently pay federal taxes.

Well since we are talking about taxes, 95% would mean 95% of tax payers or all Americans who pay taxes (since that is the only crowd that would be concerned). But I understand we lose the power of inference as we age.

2) I was talking about corporate taxes. You seem to be on individual taxes. (I think. It's hard to tell by your post). If you own a pizzaria, and you make more than 250,000 a year, Obama promises to raise your corporate tax rate from the already astronomical 35% to a mind-boggling 39%.

Is a pizzeria a corporation, paying corporate taxes, or a sole proprietorship? or maybe a limited Partnership or a LLC? What do you think? S Corp maybe? S Corps don't pay corporate taxes either. How about your normal C Corp.... yeah, those are the monstrous bastards who already are limiting America employment with overseas labor. But y'know what, as an incentive, did you know Obama will offer a tax cut to those Corps to housing all of their jobs here in America?

3) Now...onto the individual tax front: Obama's proposal is for FAMILIES making more than $250,000.

So, how many single people, unmarried do you know that make $250k annually and because they have NO dependents, what are they worried about. (shaking head). The point is, he is lowering the taxes for everyone... or 95% of America. : )

Behind my screen, I understand what Pat is saying, She is saying she wants the kind of freedom we used to have before the secularist. Think of it like this, if I were to go to the school and tell them my daughter has been sick and I really didn't want to have her engaged in physical education for a week, the school would tell me she would have to do physical education because I didn't come to the school with a doctors note. This to me is a violation of my personal freedom because I am the child's mother and I feel I know whats right for my daughter, Its not up to the school to impose on my parenting, but they do it all the time.

Hey Beverly H,

Hello, we meet again : )

I responded to Pat N, about the corporate taxes. Let me know what you think.

Y'know.. my point is Whether Behind the scenes support Pat's freedom or not is not issue. For instance, I don't have to like what you believe but if it doesn't infringe on anyone else, then what difference does it make.

America is a country of many beliefs.

Oh, there I go jumping into a message board again... what was I thinking? (sarcasm)

Beverly H,

You would have the Freedom to take you daughter to a private school. But, you still are able to get her not to engage PE by getting a doctors note. Now are you arguing freedom or having to go out of your way to get a doctors note? That's just the rules of the school you chose to put her in.

Now if the schools says despite what you do, she has to engage in PE, I would consider that a step on your freedom.

Sometimes people think freedom should be I can circumvent all the rules even if I don't own the institution. Home school is another choice you have.

Pat, I did not side step your question. Maybe you need me to be more explicate. I agree with the rights you listed in the way I explained them.

Bev.

You have the right to do what you described, but you must verify that the request is coming from you and not some note. If schools allowed simple notes to suffice for getting students out of activities in a class with out verification then there would be no way to tell which students are for real and which ones are forging notes to get out of school work. If some stupid person at the school told you you needed a doctor's note, then you have to exercise your rights by taking it to the school board.

Freedom does not come free. no one is there to hold your hand while you exercise it and the process is never perfect. you must fight to exercise your freedoms, sometimes there is very little fight, some times you need to take time out of your schedule to actually engage in the fight.

And I think you need to get the religious chip off your shoulder. There is no persecution of religion in schools. Children can openly pray in class if they choose to. they can wear religious clothing and jewelry, they can have their own religious clubs, etc. What can not happen however is religion being promoted by an employee of the school to the students and families.

One Party,

Yes, many people do not understand the difference between "freedom" and "do what I want".

What do you people want. Whites to pay all your bills for you so that you can just take and take. Personally I am tired of my tax dollars paying for welfare, subsidizeing 450,000 homes to people to lazy to work knowing they can't afford them, or to high and mighty to take low paying jobs because they feel its beneath them. Black or White!! Its time we got rid of these social programs and make Americans stand on their own feet again.

Don`t we provide welfare to a number of states in the form of disaster relief aid? Say like the gulf coast area, known dangers of living there, they wear a target every Hurricane season. Yet states like Florida, Texas have no state income tax? Depend on welfare from the Government to save them from their mistakes? Encourage movement to their area instead of away multiplying the problem? Build homes on the shore and cry when they are gone?

Just seems to me color doesn`t matter much in the welfare line. You know you have a problem, but no state tax to fix it? You depend on a social program!

Its time we got rid of these social programs and make Americans stand on their own feet again.

ummm, its because of things like Bush, GOP and Less Gov't why, AIG needed to be bailed out by the Gov't.

Tax payers may have to bail America out of the crisis according to Today's news. So are you saying we should let it fall?

Also, what do you say for the hardworking white American who has 30 years on the job and lost his job to overseas labor and now need assistance until he can secure employment because he has no way to support his family. And the job market is so tough it may take him up to a year to find employment that will allow his family to survive. Social Programs will help him.

do you say, we should have no social programs and let him and his family take their own chances? I guess in that case we better prepare for an increase in the homeless population in this economy.

One Party, I understand what you are saying but at the same time I can't help but think back in the day when I was in school you didn't have to jump through hoops in order to provide for your child, It was the parent who decided as to what the child should or should not do, no questions asked. It is no longer like that and in some places in the U.S; you are not afforded the luxury of placing your child in the public school of choice, it is decided by district where the child should go, so in a sense the rights of the parent are again dooped. I do Home school my daughter because I feel she is able to achieve academically more then if she were in school, I have a chartered Academy that helps in providing school curriculum and state testing...It's actually a good program.
Behind my screen, I stated in my hypothetical that I went to the school. not that I sent a note.
Hey, I didn't say anything about religion, why say I have a chip on my shoulder?

I agree with you Beverly but you know what happened, people started taking advantage. America became overweight. And teachers kept getting blamed when they kid did come back to PE class and couldn't hack it and failed. I also think the reason things have changed is people are never satisfied.

That's why the rules of the road have to apply to everyone. But I'm sure you know this: good or bad someone will always find something to complain about.

I couldn't image in every American would put their child in Public school of choice. You would have one over crowded school and one empty one. They try to make it fair across the board and also have some control over the entire school system.

But one thing I see, is the School and Parents have grown apart in the relationship in many states, rich and poor.

Nothing is like it used to be, sadly. Music, Food, brotherly love.... you name it.

Kudos to you on the home schooling.

Thank You one Party, Its just such a shame that my children and yours will never get to see America at its best, Neighbor helping neighbor and loving every minute of it. People have become more robotic every year, so into themselves, as the country comes crashing down upon us. I am a veteran and a very patriotic person and to see the degradation in this country is just killing me, People won't wake up and see it for what it really is and we get closer to socialism every day. I only pray by the grace of god that he (god) interveins in this very crutial time.

Economics are not what you should be fearing Beverly (Socialism is economics) you should be fearing authoritarianism.

let me ask you some questions.

Do you think it is bad if all the residents of a small town decide to put 10 dollars into a fund for a park that everyone can have fun in?

To contrast this idea, do you think it is bad if the mayor and the sheriff come house to house in same said town and barge into the homes, and force each person to pay 10 dollars for a park that everyone can have fun in?

Both instances are socialism. The first example would be a type of libertarianism, the second would be authoritarianism.

Socialism is not the problem, it is the method in which the money is gathered and the method used to decide on what to spend it on that is the problem.

BMS, I see what you are saying but what you are leaving out is Unionization of business which is clearly what the Obama people are in favor of, which is also Socialism, and it is the authoritarian type, basically if you choose not to go along with a union what happens?
Just look at these large companies run by unions, if you buck the union you are not only risking physical harm you are risking your livelyhood. It is not a good thing for America, free enterprize no strings attached that is what is good for America.

The employee free choice act does not force workers to join unions to work in a shop.

You are still mixing up the idea with the implementation and calling the idea bad.

Unionization is not authoritarian by nature and provides many benefits for workers.

The system that cropped up in the US became corrupted and that is where the problems came up.

And free enterprise with no regulation is not good for America, that is what got us into the current financial mess we are in, it is what started the great depression and it is what caused the Savings and Loan collapse in the 80's.

Dear Behind,
I am 16. My mom asked me to read your opinion on the parental notification issue regarding teenage abortion. I did. I asked her if I could tell you what a loser you are. She said I could, but I had to explain why I thought you were a loser and not just call you a loser.

this is what you and my mom said to each other

(YOU:) Pat,

Personal Freedom ends where you begin to trample on the rights of others.

(MY MOM) 1) My 16 year old can not go out and get an abortion, should she become pregnant, without my consent.

(YOU) This is not a freedom for you. You want the state to impose a rule on everyone to make parenting easier for you/

You sir, and people like you make me sick. You honestly support a teenager going out and getting an abortion without telling their parents. We are not physically or mentally mature yet and you want to dump this kind of life changing decision into our laps. Back off, will ya? Let us grow up before putting this kind of pressure on us!

I've said all I have to say. I will go to bed tonite happy because your testicles have been tied in a knot by a 16 year old conservative virgin in a public forum. That's a small price for you to pay after what you've done to my generation.

Thanks Pat, I'm glad to see other parents actually care about there kids!

@paul

Don`t we provide welfare to a number of states in the form of disaster relief aid?

"At this festive season of the year, Paul," said the gentleman, taking up a pen, "it is more than usually desirable that we should make some slight provision for the Poor and Destitute, who suffer greatly at the present time. Many thousands are in want of common necessaries; hundreds of thousands are in want of common comforts, sir."

"Are there no prisons?" asked Paul.

"Plenty of prisons," said the gentleman, laying down the pen again.

"And the Union workhouses?" demanded Paul. "Are they still in operation?"

"They are. Still," returned the gentleman, "I wish I could say they were not."

"The Treadmill and the Poor Law are in full vigour, then?" said Paul.

"Both very busy, sir."

"Oh! I was afraid, from what you said at first, that something had occurred to stop them in their useful course," said Paul. "I'm very glad to hear it."

"Under the impression that they scarcely furnish Christian cheer of mind or body to the multitude," returned the gentleman, "a few of us are endeavouring to raise a fund to buy the Poor some meat and drink and means of warmth. We choose this time, because it is a time, of all others, when Want is keenly felt, and Abundance rejoices. What shall I put you down for?"

"Nothing!" Paul replied.

"You wish to be anonymous?"

"I wish to be left alone," said Paul. "Since you ask me what I wish, gentlemen, that is my answer. I don't make merry myself at Christmas and I can't afford to make idle people merry. I help to support the establishments I have mentioned -- they cost enough; and those who are badly off must go there."

"Many can't go there; and many would rather die."

"If they would rather die," said Paul, "they had better do it, and decrease the surplus population. Besides -- excuse me -- I don't know that."

"But you might know it," observed the gentleman.

"It's not my business," Paul returned. "It's enough for a man to understand his own business, and not to interfere with other people's. Mine occupies me constantly. Good afternoon, gentlemen!"

I am mixed about Unionization and I admit not really an authority on the subject, but I can honestly say I believe in regulation but not unionization. There is too much of a power struggle between unions and corporations, unionized workers and exempt. In today's age, I believe regulation is necessary but not in the form of unions.

Pat N,

It's great you let your 16 year old daughter respond but she should be respectful to adults despite if she disagrees with their views. This is a BIG problem in our country that we, growing up couldn't do. You allow your daughter to make these type of remarks but then want to turn around an defend her is someone really starts digging in to her. I'm appalled that you would let her be so disrespectful. In America we should respect each other at all times, despite differences of opinion.

I would like to add, in response to your daughter, that sometimes parents aren't present and these young girls cannot take care of themselves let alone a child. It's great your have a good mom, but when a teen has no parents and living in shelters or with older boyfriends because their parents died and they didn't have any other family, they sometimes look to love (with a guy) because they are not getting it from anywhere else. Everyone needs someone to love them.

So the teen girl is taken advantage of and left alone. Still in school with no help, barely making it. I'm sorry but in that case I would recommend a great doctor who can guide her through. Sometimes people like you are in great situations, with great futures but you are a little inexperienced in life to judge another.

What do you say to the 16yr old that is raped and made pregnant? Should she have to live her life every day seeing the face of her attacker? Because that baby will look just like him. And she didn't consent so, she didn't make any bad decisions.

What about those who family members take advantage of them when they're even younger and when they get 16 they end up pregnant by their own family member. Is it fair to that girl, who have not been taught correctly, and will now have serious trust issues because her own family sinned against her? Will she be mentally able to raise that child?

Pat N, think twice about letting your daughter rant on, disrespecting adults. Before she judges have her do some community service work in any inner-city and listen to people's stories while she shows her concerning and helping hand.

Good luck in the Navy you testicle tying virgin who is a 16 year old conservative (shaking head... shame. All the good you are doing and look what comes out of your mouth. And with your mom consent.)

Beverly H,

I don't really agree with unions either. I've seen the best and worst of them. I do agree with some form of regulation because companies do take advantage of workers. I've seen that also. I've seen good people fired by managers to hire family members. That's not right.

So while until some other form of regulation is in place, I think I'll play the give and take game here and take the unionization for now.

Anonymous and LIAMD,

Thank you so much for your kind words for Rebekah. I'm extremely proud and extremely lucky to have a daughter like her.

Believe me...posting on a message board isn't something I'd normally let her do, but this is a subject she's passionate about. She said something about a month ago that summed it up well. She said that an abortion is an elective medical procedure and she asked if the same people that were in favor of no parental consent were also in favor of a 15 year old walking into a plastic surgeon to get breast implants without parental consent.

Needless to say...I was rolling with laughter. Out of the mouths of babes.

I let her post on the condition that she not read the responses. There's too many people here that are too far to the left, they would think nothing of laying into a teen to promote their agenda.

I'm surprised One Party is suggesting I supress her freedom of speech when this whole portion of the thread got started based on personal freedoms.

Freedom of speech doesn't mean you have to be disrespectful and vulgar. Many do not know that freedom of speech is a crime if it offends another person.

The freedom of speech is not absolute. Legal systems, and society at large, recognize limits on the freedom of speech, particularly when freedom of speech conflicts with other values or rights.[12] Exercising freedom of speech always takes place within a context of competing values. Limitations to freedom of speech may follow the "harm principle" or the "offense principle", for example in the case of pornography or "hate speech".Limitations to freedom of speech may occur through legal sanction and/or social disapprobation.

It's good to know this before going into one of the Armed Forces. I think your daughter is on great path to success and being a model citizen. That's why I'm speaking out of love and to show her she can voice her opinions without disrespecting others.

One Party,
(Incidentally...this is Pat again. Rebekah won't be back)

Let me get this straight:

Teenagers should be able to make life altering decisions that could radically change the their future reproductive capabilities, change their life and destroy the life of another human being when the full scope of their worldly experience is High School and perhaps, a job at McDonalds.

BUT

Teenagers should not be allowed full 1st Amendment Rights.

I'm struggling here. Help me out.

One Party, You claim Rebekah was 'vulgar'. I read her post before she hit the send button. I reread it when I read your response. I'm having a hard time seeing any vulgarity. The closest thing is 'testicles' which is a medically accepted term for the male genitals.

Was she blunt? Yep. Did she call a spade a spade? Yep. Was she passionate in her response? Yep again.

When was the last time you were in a High School for any length of time, One Party? Are you even aware of whats going on? If I had to go into the battle field every day like she does, I'd be pretty passionate too.

She has seen kids that get high with their parents because the parents believe pot should be legal and it doesn't hurt anyone. The girls have peer pressure from the boys and from the school to have sex. The boys are saying "C'mon! Everyone does it! It's fun!" and the schools are concurring by passing out condoms.

Rebekah is 5'1", 110 lbs. She can squat 190 lbs. This beats the school record, but she can't get credit for it because the school did away with any type of non-athetic team competition due to the fact that it might damage a kids fragile little psyche.

We are raising a generation of kids that think the world revolves around their belly button. Is that really what you want in your future leaders?

Ok. The 1st Amendment has limitations... I didn't make the rules. So it is allowed but under the completeness of the right, not just the first line of it.

Some teenagers do not have good mothers to turn to and have to be their own parent. That's all I'm saying. There are many 16 year old girls who have lost everything through to circumstances out of their control. They feed and for the most part are alone in the world. They end up waiting for foster parents but are usually too old (because most people look to adopt young kids)

So these girls grow up feeling unloved and unwanted. They meet a boyfriend and finally think they have found love but instead get used for sex. When their pregnant the guy runs off. She is left alone at 16 and cannot even take care of herself. So that job at McDonalds becomes her life because of inflation, it's expensive for college educated adults to live and take care of a baby alone.

Thank God, your daughter gets to live a 16 year old life. But the world is not like that everywhere. Too many times, young girls are taken advantage of and aren't given much of a choice or shot in life. Many of them end up committing suicide.

So I'm saying, in those cases, which are very true, real and often enough and in those cases, or cases where these girls have no where to turn, I would prefer a great doctor to help them along out of compassion for them.

Sometimes their future are radically changed for the worst for the young girls and their babies. And its sad. But its real.

One Party,
I searched thoroughly for this 'clause' you claim to the 1st Amendment. Where you claim freedom of speech is illegal if it offends someone. Can't find it anywhere. Please supply your source.

Also covered under the 1st Amendment is war protests and pornography/obscenity. I find these offensive, therefore, according to you...they are illegal. Who do I call?

In closing, you called my daughter disrespectful and vulgar. (I find that offensive, but promise not to have you arrested as I believe in your freedom of speech)

I'm still waiting for you to back up your claims regarding her and show me where she was vulgar.

Pay, I did not think your daughter was vulger, and I have taught my 14 year old daughter to respect her body and self. I think as parents it is our duty to provide them information and guide them. You should be very proud of your daughter, might I add conservative daughter..she's tops in my book.

Sorry pat, I meant Pat not pay, its early

One day, back in the days, I was screaming "freedom of speech" also and it was brought to my attention that you can't use your freedoms to harm or offend people. I was challenged to look it up and actually went and got a printed copy of the constitution and the first amendment. Needless to say I was shocked that I was wrong. : )

While the extremes vary I'll give you an example; there are documented cases when people wrote their opinions about other people and it was considered slander and they paid the penalty of the law. It's usually personal opinions. But when aired, especially over a medium like this message board, it could be considered slander. Now this is just a broad example I'm giving. Just like many considered burning the American flag freedom of speech but it is a crime punishable by law.

Now just as a quick reference, the quote I posted below is from wikipedia. Now if you want to go to the library and get a printed copy be my guest.

The freedom of speech is not absolute. Legal systems, and society at large, recognize limits on the freedom of speech, particularly when freedom of speech conflicts with other values or rights.[12] Exercising freedom of speech always takes place within a context of competing values. Limitations to freedom of speech may follow the "harm principle" or the "offense principle", for example in the case of pornography or "hate speech".Limitations to freedom of speech may occur through legal sanction and/or social disapprobation.

Now the questions I asked really would test her "concern" that she was taught to have and her viewpoints on the harshest realities of life, not just the bubble most 16 year old girls live in. It's easy when you are a virgin by choice, but how would the mental stability be of a 16 year old who had no choice and parents who drink more than they eat.

Behind my Screen, gave an honest and intelligent answer to your question. In what I thought was a very mature tone and well spoken (from the few posts I've read). But then a 16yr old girl comes from an inexperienced viewpoint (not unintelligent, but yes inexperienced in life) and then added unnecessary extras, although quite eloquent I must say...lol She hasn't had sex yet and talking about twisted testicles to an adult... then blamed Behind the Scenes for what has happened to her generation and all with such vigor and an overall tone that I couldn't imagine her speaking to her teachers in.

So after reading you daughters response, I thought, wow, she is intelligent and has a lot going on for herself. Kudos to you as a mom... but kids are kids and it takes a village to raise a child : )

Pat,

Your daughter was not vulgar, but she was certainly rude. I know that my full philosophy on the subject of abortion was not put out there for you at the time you allowed your daughter to respond, but no one should treat another human being with such disrespect, no matter what the age.

You may have raised your daughter to have a strong moral code in how she should behave, but you certainly have not raised her well regarding how to communicate with people you disagree with. You have allowed her to act out in the most base of human ways and raising her with such training will only hurt her in the future.

Do you think she should behave as she did when she is an adult in the work place? How about in a court room? Teach her the art of rhetoric and you will have given her a gift that very few children receive anymore.

Pat,

As to the content of what you and your daughter believe.

One Party did a pretty good job of outlining the reasons that a girl may not want to discuss the issue with her parents, or perhaps can not discuss the issue with her parents.

Not everyone has parents who are as caring and forgiving as you are with your daughter. Many people have parents that will kick them to the curb, beat the crap out of them, or were involved in the conception. Requiring blanket parental notification in these situation is ridiculous and cruel.

You seek to protect your ability to know when your daughter wants to have an abortion. The fact of the matter is that it is not the state's job to make parenting easier for you. If you believe you raised your daughter properly, then there should be no reason for her to need an abortion, or if some horrific action did occur and you were amenable to abortions in certain cases (totally hypothetical for rhetorical sake), then you should have raised her to come to you for help.

Using the state to compel a girl to behave in a manor that she should behave if raised properly is not the proper dominion of the state.

This is not about morality, this is about the correct dominion of the state.

Something I brought up with Beverly,

If you seek the reduce the number of abortions, then you must allow women and girls to have the same rights regarding adoption. Currently, women do not need the fathers consent to have an abortion, but to give the baby up for adoption at birth, they do.

I propose that the laws change so that pregnant unmarried women and girls can decide to give the baby up for adoption at birth with out the father's consent. This issue in the law befell my cousin who is from a family as deeply religious as yours. The father did not want to give the baby up and he has not seen his daughter more than 2 times in the 5 years of her life and he has not paid a dime in child support. had such a law been in place, this would not have been a problem.

Beverly,
A 14 year old girl! What a great age! That's about the time they are squarely between 'kid' and 'independent young woman'. They still like to have fun, still need mom when they feel icky, roll their eyes when their room needs cleaned...(but do it anyway), like to hang with mom and start asking some tough questions.

It's wonderful you two are so close. Daughters need their moms and we are truly blessed and enriched by the relationship.

Its our responsibility to clothe, shelter an feed our kids. It's our responsibility to make sure they get an education. Put it's also our resonsibility to teach them right from wrong regaring their bodies, their actions an their deeds and their are consequences to what they do.

No school, guidance counsellor or clinic can take our place on these very personal issues.

Congratulations on having a great kid and being a great mom!

BMS,
You had stated that:

This is not a freedom for you. You want the state to impose a rule on everyone to make parenting easier for you

Yet you are suggesting that the state impose a rule on everyone to benefit a very small minority of people. You want to give this right to a select few without regard to the majority.

I find it interesting that you label everyone who is pro-life as 'deeply religious'. Abortion can be a moral issue too, BMS...not just a religious one. You have no idea what my religious beliefs are and to assume you do is the height of arrogance. You can't even begin to presume what life events or philosophies my pro-life stance stems from.

Also, the adoption laws in your state must be different than ours. We are talking about teenagers here. If a teenager gets pregnant, wants to carry the child to term and then place it for adoption, they need only parental consent. No consent of the teenage father is require. So I guess you and I agree on this point. Parental consent for abortion and adoption.

Finally, I had to smile when you said Rebekah was 'rude'. This, coming from someone who presumes to know a persons religious beliefs, claims people have a 'chip on their shoulder' and bristles when he gets pushback from a kid rather than addressing the content of her statements. That's very hypocritical, BMS.

I reread her post again. She started it with the salutation of "Dear". She referred to you as "sir". She bluntly and pointedly asked you some very tough questions. No where was she rude, safe for possibly the last paragraph.

Since rueness offends you so much, and since you are not a hypocrit, I will be watching for you to reprimand every poster on this board who has been 'rude', regardless of political persuasion.

(to all...I apologize in advance for the spelling errors in the posts. Keys on the laptop seem to be sticking. Time to get out the $8 can of air and spray the freaking thing out!)

BMS and One Party,
I was just reading through all of this again and it dawned on me.

The two of you are confusing the word 'notification' with the word 'consent' and using the two interchangably.

Incidentally, BMS...I'm sitting here in shorts and a T-shirt. My hair is in a ponytail and I have no makeup on. I'm posting to a message board. It's 9:49 on Sunday morning where I am. I obviously have not been to church this morning and am not getting ready to go. In fact, I am getting ready to vaccuum and scrub toilets and then take the dogs for a walk.

Since I am so 'deeply religious' in your opinion...does this mean I'm going to hell?

Sorry,

deeply atheistic.

Frankly, I don't care about your religious practice.

As to consent and notification,

given your daughters stance on the subject, it seems you are unaware of the difference. So, All a girl needs to do is place a call to her mom or dad from planned parenthood to say "I'm having an abortion".

That sort of tosses out everything your daughter said.

BMS,
Your weak, tongue-in-cheek apology is acknowledged. I know it must have been difficult for you to admit you were wrong. Afterall, I haven't seen you admit to a single imperfection in a single post. But then again, those who don't believe in God, tend to act like they ARE God.

Now, if only we could get One Party to admit that freedom of speech is not a crime, should it offend someone.

Another interesting point: You say 'Given my DAUGHTERS stance' followed by 'it seems YOU are unaware...' Do you not view her as her own person with her own opinions? Yet you view her as mentally and emotionally capable of making a life altering decision on her own, without the input of her parents?

I'm fully aware of 'consent' vs 'notification'.
YOU are the one who stated that requiring blanket notification is 'cruel'. I think you meant consent.

I personally believe consent from whomever has jurisdiction over the child should be required. But I'll take notification for now. At least it's a step in the right direction.

How does the difference toss out everything my daughter said? She asked who you thought should pay for the abortions.

She expressed extreme displeasure at the cavalier attitude toward sex and drugs people from our generation place on her generation. BTW...Did you know there's a website out there called positive.org that encourages kids to have sex?

She asked if you thoughts regarding what the 13 year old 8th grader thats pregnant should do.

It's beginning to look as though you've been flummoxed by a teenager since you've decided to completely dismiss her points rather than address them. Hmmm...maybe she really did tie your testicles in a knot.

Pat,

Are you bi-polar? No where have I been rude to you. I think the end of our discussion has arrived. I can't have a rational discussion with an idealouge.

Dearest (hiding) Behind My Screen

Not bi-polar. Just tenacious. Consider me a pitbull with lipstick.

You've not only been rude, you've been condesending and arrogant. You presumed to know the religious beliefs of both myself and Beverly. You've thoroughly dismissed opposing points of view in a harsh, blunt manner..(and choked when you were given a dose of your own medicine I might add)

You've stated that I did a poor job is raising my daughter with regard to how to communicate with people she disagrees with and based that assumption on one post.

When challenged to address her points, you dismissed her as irrelevant.

And you end it with childish name calling. ("Are you bi-polar" and 'Idealogue') when you've been called out.

It doesn't surprise me that, after dedicating a large amount of your time to this thread, indicating that you are passionate about the subject, you are suddenly wanting to put an end to it after being made to squirm a bit. Previous history would indicate that you aren't used to people challenging you to this extent on a subject and have become smug with regard to having the 'last word'.

I'll untie your testicles and let you gracefully back out though. That's just the kind of nice person I am.

The discussion with you is officially ended at your request. Keep in mind though, If you decide to re-engage, I'll be there with bells on and will be just as tenacious.

Chalk one up for pro-life conservatives. We've won this particular battle...now on to the war.

Anonymous...
Typical of not only athiests, but the far left. I'm guessing if you, Beverly or I were as assertive in supporting BMS's opinions rather than opposing them, he'd be our biggest cheerleader.

The hypocrisy is almost blinding. Not just on issues and personal freedoms, but even with regard to how he labels himself. Pragmatist, indeed. A true pragmatist wouldn't hang out on a message board spouting opinion, conjecture and theory.

I'm grateful to have you and Beverly around here. It's about time conservatives became just as outspoken as their liberal counterparts. The two of you are wonderful at speaking up, backing up what you say with fact and sticking to it without being bullied.

One could only hope your statements are true. However, rationalizing the record levels of blacks that will be voting for Obama as self interest is laughable. For the past 30 someting years, the black community has voted Democratic in the range of the 90 to low 90%. And yet there plight is still the same. This year, I have heard projections to be in the 97% range (albiet we won't know until the election). What has changed to up these figures? Certainly not the position on the issues. Obama's stance is even more left of center than in recent years. In one word, Race.

Or as the great mayor John Street said "the brothers and sista's are in control now"

It is easy to see the ascertions for this article, it is specifically designed to call those of us who do not vote for Obama, racist. I am not racist, I am an Illinoisan who knows Obama's voting records, his ties to Chicago Politics, his ties to unsavory associations and mostly I hear his outright lies about his body of work. I wait to hear actual solutions to problems coming from his mouth, yet his campaign surrogates continue to prompt him with the "usual" political paltitudes. So please don't lump me as racist, I know exactly how this man has voted and lied to Americans. Yes!, lied to us about his record.

Pat I thank you, Don't let some of these bumbling idiots ruffle your feathers, You have what it takes to be a strong inspiration for your daughter and in the real picture of things its the kids that inherit the world, We as parents have to encourage our children to be strong and hold dear the things that really matter. I home school my daughter right now and I love sharing my time with her, I am lucky in the since that I am able to work from home and be with my daughter.
Stay Strong, Hang on Tight , and get out there and knock their socks off. (the liberals)
AJ is a great encouragement to have around.

Our government school system is beyond bull@!$%#. I too refuse to let my child be
led into the corral like a dumb stray to be branded. Look at what the system is loading
into the school system troughs to feed to our children. Individual creativity and freedoms
stressed? Not on the menu anymore. A once solid curriculum hijacked by the Teachers union. Congratulations on doing the right thing. Many of our youth will not escape the
mind cloning process. It's a dangerous system that only responsible parents can defeat.
I pray we're not running out of them.

Pat, I've been away for some time and see this has been a very active conversation. You spoke very well but had no mention of your daughters ending comments. I understand you are defending your daughter at all costs but we are not attacking your daughter, we are actually pointing out something that I'm sure many on this board had to learn the hard way. You can't just speak your mind any way you want to, anytime you want to.

Also, I posted the source of the amendment, how about you post your source and I can point out what you are missing so that there is clarity on the laws of our country. I even gave examples to which you had no response to other than sticking to your guns that freedom of speech is fine even if it offends.

I've mention time and time over, I think your daughter is intelligent, well spoken and really great as you are a mom, but yet, as many due we hat to admit our errors. But that is when real growth takes place.

Now your daughter wasn't speaking to me, but when I read it I thought it was rude. The vulgar really came from her totally expression and attitude but I will ADMIT, vulgar was a bad choice of words. I challenge her to tell any of her Naval officers, that she put their testicles in a twist and blame them for them for Naval shortcomings. What do you think will happen? Is respect only given to the uniform?

So respect should be held for everyone which is why FREEDOM does not allow us to offend or impose on the freedom of others.

What is not mentioned also, is I never spoke against your motherhood or the inspiration you are to your daughter. I have commended you over and over. So for Beverly to say these bumbling idiots ruffle your feathers, I think I have spoken with sincerity, going out of my way to post resources and explain my statement to help and not hurt.

Another source:

A commonly heard mantra is, "Read your Constitution - it's a free country, you know!" Well, read your Constitution - it never says it is a free country. The implication of the aphorism is that in the United States, you can do whatever you want to do, and the Constitution is there to ensure that. It is certainly true that the Constitution protects many civil rights. The 1st Amendment ensures freedom of religious choice and freedom of speech, but those things are not without limit. You cannot create a religion that allows you to kill someone without civil punishment; you cannot use libelous or slanderous words without recourse. There are other things that restrict freedom - from the ability to suspend habeas corpus to the issuance of patents. Certainly the United States is a very free country, but it is not totally free - which is actually a good thing, unless you actually like anarchy. It is interesting to note that in his confirmation hearings in 2005, John Roberts said several times, "It's a free country." It will be interesting to see how this enters into his judicial philosophy on the Court.

Steve I understand your frustration. As a parent with children in the public school system I am also dis-heartened at times. But I have a few reasons for not yanking my kids out of the system. It weakens the already weak system. The public school is fundamental to our nation. Weakening it is not the answer. Where I live we have had a number of charter schools open in the 10 years. I know several families that have moved their children to them. They are not getting better scores on their national standards testing (in some cases lower scores) but they have drained our schools of funding. We have lost teachers, activities and advanced placement programs that we used to have. My son has been in the gifted and talented program for the last 3 years and this they had to cut the funding so now he is a teacher aide. Spreading the limited dollars even to even more schools is not the answer. We need to make sure we educate everyone and it simply isn't getting done. I agree that the school system needs a radical overhaul but what we are doing now is only making it worse.

Not over it, I've worked in the school district and have seen the problems first hand, the teachers are faced with having to babysit the children that have no self control and when the parents are brought in front and center they do nothing to discipline, how can a teacher teach a class of 35 students when she has no control, therefore the school districts bring in aids to help in the classrooms costing the district more of the money that should be going to books and other learning materials. I decided I had enough of that and chose to pull my daughter out and home-school her, she is academically above grade level and I won't risk her staying in a failing school and losing the chance of a scholarship later.
The whole problem with the school system is that there is very little parental involvement with the children and parents blame the schools for the action of the student.
If parents would just spend time with their kids and give them the guidance they need there would be no failing schools.

Beverly

"The whole problem with the school system is that there is very little parental involvement with the children and parents blame the schools for the action of the student.
If parents would just spend time with their kids and give them the guidance they need there would be no failing schools."

agreed...what is your plan to do that and how are you going to legislate it?

Or maybe you want to just throw your hands int the air and give up. I'm sure it won't have a devastating impact on the US if we have a completely uneducated society.

anonymous jones,

It depends how the court interprets your infraction. You may be well within your right to free speech and cause a riot. You will be persecuted. For what, other people's actions? No for inciting a riot... but, all you did was speak your mind.

I challenge you, go into an elementary school and start cussing with every sentence you speak. You don't have to yell. But soon you will be asked to leave. And if you refuse because you are exercising your right. You will be escorted out by Police, who you would hope just move you out the school and not book you. But why did you have to leave? Because you exercised your right?

Above, I posted the two principals where Freedom of Speech is limited. "hate" and "offense". Most people just will pay you not mind if you start ranting aimlessly. So people feel like they can beat their chest in pride because they exercised their right.... LOL.

All three of them?...

I just find it difficult to reconcile the idea of a racist democrat. It seems oxymoronic to me (not to mention just moronic). We're the big tent party. The diversity party. The look out for the people being trampled party. Why would you choose this party if you felt this way about black Americans?

It's not a conflict...as long as none of "them" decide to run...

I just find it difficult to reconcile the idea of a racist democrat.

Your understanding of the history of American politics leaves much to be desired.

The look out for the people being trampled party

Actually, the party of the ultra-rich playing the poor off against the middle class.

The diversity party

The stuffing ballot boxes with votes from illegal immigrants rounded up and bussed to the polls for that purpose party. At least in my state, minorities living above the poverty line tend to vote republican. I guess they don't want to be taxed back to the soup kitchen.

Why would you choose this party if you felt this way about black Americans?

Perhaps because of your pro-choice, anti-gun, and other views?

I just find it difficult to reconcile the idea of a racist democrat.

People vote Democrat for a variety of reasons, and while most blue voters may be fine accepting the idea of diversity, racial prejudices run pretty deep when faced directly.

I've heard plenty of otherwise openminded people fall prey to stereotypes that are pretty ingrained in our society.

People vote for their own particular interests. I've seen a few Democrat acquaintances suddenly just "like" McCain and distrust Obama - they pick and choose what they want to believe. I see it as another Dixiecrat movement going over to the Republicans. Good riddance.

Black Republicans are "Oxymorons". There are really only a few in existence, and the Republicans wear them out every election, by jetting them around the country to place them front and center behind their Candidates to appear in every snap-shot. Look closely and you will see they are all the same "black", "yellow" or oriental persons in every shot. We also know they ship their own hand picked clappers and hooters to every rally who are cued when to clap or laugh; and only card carrying Republicans are allowed into the audiences of each show, even handing out preprinted signs, so they all look unified in their opinions. They wouldn't actually want any real opinions expressed in their audience~ as any uncensored member might actually ask some hard to answer questions, or might actually show real grief at the devastation that has been caused by the Bush Administrations Policies. The responsibility for their mis-deeds and greed has been dumped on the entire state of the world.

What happens to Blacks in the Republican Party? The "Party on Inclusion", the party of consideration for all, the Democrats call them "Uncle Tom" and "Oreo", that's what happens. Want examples: Justice Thomas is visciously attacked byt eh Democratic party nto for his views, but for any lies they can drum up. Want another? Lt. Gov Michael Steele was called "Uncle Tom" and "Oreo" by Dems in the state legislature. Then the term "slavish" was applied to hime by none other than Dem Sen Cardin. And when he complained, Dem Rep Steny Hoyer told him to "get over it". Yet VA Sen Allen uses a term, "macca", no one had ever heard of before at a Webb supporter at a rally not supposed to be on tape, and all heck broke loose. The supporter wasn't even upset until a press person told him to be. These are FACTS, not opinions. If there is a racial divide in this country, it comes as much friom the left and thier race baiters as from the right. Remember, a hero to the Dems ni the senate, Robert Byrd, WAS a leader in the KKK in WV.

Septic,

You are right. The Democrats are the party of the rich playing off the poor. What does that make the Republicans? The party of the Rich ignoring everyone else.

There are racist in all parties. If you can't believe a democrat could be racist, remember Lester Maddox the Governor of Georgia in the sixties was as racist as they come.

I have no delusions about Racism in the Democratic party. I think he is simply too young to realise that there is a lot of those idiots left in the party.

I don't think so. The black people that I know, Dems also are going to vote for McCain.

You know it will. I have 15 employees. 5 are Black, three that say they are Democrat's and two say they are Republicans. After the conventions we were talking at lunch one day and the subject of who they voted for came up and to a man they all said they voted for Obama. I asked my forman who is a Black Rebublican why he crossed over and he said because Obama is Black and its making history. That was the reason both of the Black Rebulicans gave. Now I know this is just a small group of men talking but it is indicative of the way Blacks have been voteing. They want a Black in the white house that is going to begin new social programs so that they can stay on welfare where it applies, not have to pay for medical benefits like I have to etc. I really do not know a lot about politics but I can't help but think that what is happening now is going to set the Black Amercian back rather then move them foreward because they are showing by the way they are voting just how racist they really are. I wonder what men who fought so hard to move blacks foreward and lost thier lives doing so for their cause would really think if they saw Blacks voteing based on color rather then what this country really needs today.

Behind Screen - you're exactly right. Both parties are the party of the rich, which is a direct result of the 2 party system, which is a direct result of the electoral college. Very few other nations do it this way, since it's inherently bad for the nation that does it - you're going to have poor leadership and poor representation.

But anyway - I'm not surprised so many whites feel this way. I'm just surprised it's getting any attention at all.

The better question is : When you gas up, does the price of gas depend on your color ?

I really do not know a lot about politics

This is obviously true, but you seem to have an interest, so why not learn something rather than bring your prejudiced view to it.

The five blacks that you know do not represent all blacks. That's what this is all about. Are you telling me that no white people benefit from social programs? That there are no white people on welfare, or food stamps, or unemployment?

Try to understand your black employees, rather than judge them. If you lived in a society that was 15% white (which is where we're headed, by the way), and there had never been a white candidate for president, you would be very tempted to vote for that person even if you didn't share all of their views. It's easy for white men to say "you should just vote for the best candidate," but how many of us would do the same if we were in that situation.

To be blunt; I am white, 59 years of age and male. I am tragically a Vietnam vet. Why
tragically ? Most posting today were not bombarded with rotten tomatoes and eggs when they returned from serving. I learned on the battlefield we all bleed the same color, and can even donate blood to another race . I am voting for Obama!!! Yes I am from Texas,
so am from the south!

Skeptic, I don't think it is his color, I believe it is far more crucial than that. I think those that are truly thinking about the country are not focused on his skin, the core of the man is what is pushing them away.

I would just like to say that rather then trying to discredit A.J. why not stop and really look and read the posts he has, it may enlighten some of you and those that don't care about anything but his skin color it wouldn't make any difference.
But after reading some of his posts and doing some of my own research, AJ you would be happy to know I converted 7, yes 7 lifetime democrats yesterday to vote republican...I am so PROUD!

AJ you would be happy to know I converted 7, yes 7 lifetime democrats yesterday to vote republican

Well, I suppose there's a chance they were lying to you so you'd leave them alone. Even if not, there's still time for them to come to their senses before the election. McCain and Palin will probably let slip enough between now and them for them to realize voting for the Republican ticket would be voting for a continuation of the failures of the last 8 years and say, ENOUGH!

Gip you should know they took me very serious, they had already expressed fear about Obama/Biden, I just gave them information I had on Obama, not only were they convinced but they were not surprised. This was a whole family of democrats,of voting age, and they were very impressed with some of the information I provided. so -7 to obama, +7 McCain...I plan to go talk to some more Dems today...

And exactly what "information" are you sharing with them?

Information that has been gathered by non other than the words from his own mouth, his past and present affiliations, his Muslim faith and how he says he will stand with the Muslims til the end...A Quote in his book by him. How he plans to protect America by disarming America, those are some of the things I proudly share with anyone who asks.

It's my understanding you can go to hell just as fast for lying as you can for stealing ;-)

Your right Ken, stop lying and start reading the facts and gathering research of your own. I don't put words in the mouth of Obama, I'd like to,but that would be because I'D LIKE HIM TO STOP LYING ABOUT WHO HE IS AND WHAT HIS TRUE INTENTIONS ARE FOR OUR GREAT COUNTRY.

Beverly, please tell me exactly which book of his you are talking about and quote it verbatim, including the page number. Until you do, I will not believe that you have read any of Senator Obama's books.

No one vote for a human that is smarter because of his skin color . That sounds logical.

No, it doesn't...WHAT???

Lets do away with the educational system. Why go to school. Who needs it not the President or Vice President. Do they let any one run a fortune 500 company . Opps may be they do.

894 of 899, you call that low? sounds pretty dang good to me, that means there were only 5 men in front of him. Where I come from, that's the front of the line. And does it really matter where you go to school, or how many you attended to get the degree?

palease...... lets not grasp a straws.

Or (apparently) how you got in to begin with...

Sounds pretty good to be last in the class.People please investigate the school system in Michigan. Ladies and gentlemen the next Republican Candidate Michigan born

good one, good one, I had it turned around, my appologies, save yor arrows, I read it wrong. you win,,,

Michigan

There were 5 men lower than he - the rest did their homework better than he did. If you look at the USNA website, you will find the oath that midshipman subscribe to - evidently McCain has either forgotten about it or never gave it much credence in the first place. Real naval heroes stick by their oath and don't lie.

It goes to show you that a racist society will take a dumb white over a smart black maybe thats why America is on the brink of going to the graveyard of civilizations. I mean a dumb 100 % white man is better than a real smart 50 % white man. Even when it has been proven that the 100 % white man is old,, dumb and stupid..

But he did graduate. That's the point. I don't care where he placed in the class. The standards are pretty high to begin with. I didn't graduate the top of my class, but that doesn't make me less a person because of that. You might as well say he was shot down in his aircraft, because he was at the bottom of the academic class. I don't buy it. The man has been in the political scene for many years, which makes him more than qualified for the job.

IMO, it is a lot harder to get into the Naval academy, than for affirmative action to get you into Harvard.

But it does make a difference where a person graduated in their class to say it doesn't is being silly, it's why children of unqualified alumni still get in to prestigious university's when in fact the only reason they got in was their parent's contributed a lot of money to the school and or its athletics's program

Goodness Renanrd...You called McCain 'old'. I think you must be an ageist. Afterall, if a white republican uses the words "Obama" and "black" in the same sentence, they're racist, right? Same rules should apply to democrats who use 'woman' and 'Palin' in the same sentence or 'old' and 'McCain' conjointly. Shame on you. Liberals are supposed to be more tolerant than that.

"IMO, it is a lot harder to get into the Naval academy, than for affirmative action to get you into Harvard." Not when your fathers an admiral in the Navy. Affirmative action might have got him in but it did not make him president of the class or get him his law degree.

Michigan born you got to do better than that .

He finished at the bottom of his class because he was a poor student.

He got shot down because he was a poor pilot.

And finally, he got into the Naval Academy because dad and gramps were Admirals.

I don't see a day's hard work in any of that.

Renard

You can TRY and down play McCain graduating from the Navel Academy if you want. Still doesn't change the fact that he did.

Plus, I would take a war veteran over a fancy lawyer who is trained to deceive and manipulate any day.

ABD3,

you know for a fact he got shot down because of his placement in calss?

Thats an insult to any pilot who has been shot down in combat.

Plus, I would take a war veteran over a fancy lawyer who is trained to deceive and manipulate any day.

Would that be because when dealing with Congress, war tactics are better skills to have than legal skills?

Also ABD

In what your saying then, it was his fault he was tortured for 5 years as a POW, and makes the sacrifice less because of that.

How many in here can agree with that way of thinking?

Good Point James,

Are you comfortable with a man running the military, who has No military experience, or someone who does.

All I have heard is how Obama says in one sentence how he wants to build up the military, and in the next, he wants to do a hatchet job on their budget. Remember Clinton's cut backs? I served in the military during the Clinton Administration. I know what happened to their budget. Not only that,

Anonymous Jones has a little story about Obamas intentions with the military, If I may ask Mr. Jones, will you link that story for James to read?

Do you call George Bush's privileged tour military experience? I got more military experience at cub scouts. Oh maybe that is why its been such a mess in Iraq. That military experience has worked out.

War experience?? You mean being in a POW camp telling everything he knows? Have you noticed?...he's still living that out!! Personally, I don't want ANYONE,war experience or not, who has only ONE story to tell. Ask the current military people about McSame's interest in THEIR war...that's why so many are backing Obama. Tells me a whole lot.

I said no such thing...read, man read!

Michigan

Acording to McCain's own stance(s) on torture, was he really tortured? I would have some respect for him if he wasn't using his POW-status (there were hundreds of POWs, come in captivity longer than McCain and treated just as badly or worse who never made any tapes) as a reason he should be president and to escape any criticism or get away from any question he can't or doesn't want to answer. He is cheapening his status by using it for political purposes. His voting record shows an absolute disdain for his fellow veterans and the bill to close off records of POW/MIAs from averyone, including the families of those soldiers, was cruel. Of course, it did keep everyone out of his records which I suspect was his intent.

Neither his status as one POW out of hundreds, nor his tenure in the senate, automatically qualify him to be president. Those setting policy don't usually consult with captains when doing so. All of sudden he now wants to correct all the problems that he, as a long-time senator, had no problems with before? Regulation vs deregulation? Gramm loopholes? The Keating 5? Native American policies? Evidence left out of the Abramoff hearings? Do some googling. See where your war hero stands along those lines.

In what your saying then, it was his fault he was tortured for 5 years as a POW, and makes the sacrifice less because of that.

No one is say being tortured is less of a sacrifice . He served this country well. There a lot of war veteran. Some who have made the ultimate sacrifice. That's why we have the obligation to vote for the best candidate .

Are you comfortable with a man running the military, who has No military experience, or someone who does.

Does the President really run the military, or do the Joint Chiefs have something to do with it.

ll I have heard is how Obama says in one sentence how he wants to build up the military, and in the next, he wants to do a hatchet job on their budget.

Well, if you look at his statements through the neocon lens, you might be confused. If you look at things objectively, you would know that Obama wants cut spending on wasteful, unnecessary, and unproven weapons systems, and increase spending on personnel, and proven weapons platforms, as well as provide funding for more National Guard style organizations.

Just look at the facts man. Don't be one who looks at your own candidate flipping around and then says, "all politicians are bad." Obama has been the most consistent, steady, thoughtful, and capable candidate around. Be honest with yourself, and really put "country first."

Michigan,

Do you have the same undying respect for the man held in prison for 25 years before being finally proven innocent.

Or doesn't being tortured by your own government count?

James, "Just look at the facts man. Don't be one who looks at your own candidate flipping around and then says, "all politicians are bad." Obama has been the most consistent, steady, thoughtful, and capable candidate around. Be honest with yourself, and really put "country first." "

REALLY!!!! Can I have some of whatever it is your smoking? Maybe I could see the light and vote for Obama too.

The president does run the military, he is where the buck stops, not the joint cheifs. Learn your civics.

Renard,

Do you have any idea, no wait before I shred your ignorant comments, please give me your definition of education. Please rank for me the different majors, etc. Explain to me how affirmative action makes Obama smarter than McCain. How did McCain's linage qualify him as a fighter pilot? It is obvious you have no idea what the difference between education and intelligence is. Straight A students are routinely turned down from jobs because passing a test and being able to apply knowledge are two very different things (this is why NCLB has been such a miserable failure). If McCain was really that dumb he should have been in a administrative role and not flying a multi-million dollar jet. If Obama was really that smart he would be able to answer off the cuff questions without sounding like a village idiot. I'll take experience over credentials any day of the week.

George, 3.53

Oops, your slip is showing...

Tom,

You must be one of those McSpammers I've heard about. Not to give you a harsh welcome, but please feel free to back up your assertions with facts rather than crap.

Arabic,huh? just another one to hate...............

Tom,
Agreed. I'm getting sick of the media hype and guilt trips that basically tell us any white democrat who doesn't vote for Obama is a racist.

There are a lot of Old Line Democrats out there, most of whom were leaning toward Hillary, that simply don't buy in to Obama's extreme liberal agenda. McCain is closer to their political belief system than Obama is.

I wonder why you never hear that the sexist male republicans won't vote for the McCain Palin ticket? Or ageists won't vote for McCain. It's interesting that the Obama crowd are the only ones that pull out the discrimination card.

You are right Pat. I hear the race thing come out of the mouths of black people more than white people. How many times you heard, "I didn't get what I wanted because I'm White"?

Untill they stop telling THEMSELVES they are inferior because they are black, things will never change.

Please stop...this is not your topic and it shows.

Michigan Born,

Good Point. Fact of the matter is that we've come further as a country regarding race based civil rights than we have for women or the older generation. In my opinion, the most dicriminated against class is the white male over 40! There are EEOC requirements in place that certain companies have to have a certain percentage of 'diversity' in their staff, regardless of whether or not those eople are qualified or not.

People have gotten so worried about being 'PC' thanks to the likes of Jackson and Sharpton, that they are afraid to offer constructive criticism or diagreement to anyone with a different skin color because they know they'll face cries and accusations of 'racism'.

here are a lot of Old Line Democrats out there, most of whom were leaning toward Hillary, that simply don't buy in to Obama's extreme liberal agenda.

What is this, a bad joke?

Hillary is much farther 'left' than Obama. Good grief. It is even worse when you decry being accused of racism then make a statement like yours.

Obama's extreme liberal agenda

If he's so extreme, then it's even more interesting that there are Conservative Republicans supporting him, like Susan Eisenhower or former National Review publisher Wick Allison, or Republican party fundraisers Wilbur O. Colom and James W. Parkinson. Of course, Democratic figures support Obama, but even conservative Democrats like Sam Nunn.

Anonymous...Thanks for the links. I have to wonder how many Obama supporters here truly know the platform he's running on? I'm betting a lot of them are voting for him simply because he's the one with the (D) behind his name.

What he's proposing for this country scares me. Over $800MM in earmarks between him and Biden, socialized health care, tax cuts for 95% of Americans (when only 70% pay federal taxes as it is...), increased spending and increasing the taxes on small businesses that make over $250,000 annually. It's a plan for disaster.

Being a blue boy trapped in a red state, I live in Birmingham, Alabama and I tell you; you are completely wrong. COMPLETELY! Everyone I know, even my father; says I like the plans Obama is talking about but I won't vote for him because hes a ni**er.... The only people I know in my state that are gonna vote for Obama are younger Americans because we are more open-minded and don't care about race, skin color, etc (with exceptions to the cornbread raised children). You can try to spin it anyway you like, and you will keep spinning spinning and spinning; but the truth of it is that people in the bible belt will not vote for him just because he is black and that is the truth if you don't realize that your ignorant.

Looks like you've given some thought to his color in order to come out with that analysis. Your friends would not SAY anything about his color out loud for fear of being thought of as ignorant but I'll bet it's in their analysis of his qualifications!!! They can't put McSame and his LACK of information and solutions up as an example of who should be running this country!!!

I wonder how many Republicans know the platform McCain is running on? I'm betting a lot of them are voting for him simply he is the one with the (R) behind his name.

His record scares me. McCain voted in favor of every deregulatory effort that came up for a vote during his 26 years in Congress and bragged well into 2008 about his free-market "deregulatory" bent. As the The Washington Post pointed out, he did raise concerns about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac after a report about shoddy accounting, but this was never a focus of his legislative career.

OMG! You are so wrong here it's scary.

OK, you are joking.

Your evidence is a anti-Obama blog that cites Obama's OWN campaign ad? Come on.

26 yrs in congress and now all of a sudden he is the change we need. I think he stole that line from some one .

How many times you heard, "I didn't get what I wanted because I'm White"?

Let me rephrase that for you "I didn't get what I wanted because of affirmative action." There fixed it.... sound familiar?

It's a fact he has voted 4 times for the murder

Yeah, because there are so many 'murder' bills that come up in the Illinois Seante. Such a backwards state!

Take your own advice pal. Medical treatment for abortion survivors has long been law in Illinois. No one voted for murder. To say so is just silly hysterics.

No, he voted against a bill that changed the verbiage of the existing bill.

But facts certainly should not get in the way of your arguments.

James,

Seriously, can I have some of what you are smoking? Obama makes Hillary look like she's a life long conservative and Hillary is further to the left than most Americans are comfortable with. Seriously, I can admit I'm pretty much a hard core conservative but you are so far to the left, liberal doesn't even get into the right zipcode.

I appreciate your willingness to air your view, but my gosh do you really believe what you are writing or are you just trying to get a rise out of people.

Hillary is no where near the left. She is a centrist Democrat in the pocket of corporations.

When the liberals stop enabling the black people is when you will see the black people stand on their own, as long as you keep them down the more they need you,but unfortunately most black people don't see it that way because they are more interested in skin color and what they can take from the government because they are black.

No doubt everyone can see what's important to you in this election -- race.

Amazing how Barak has stood on his own two feet and has been pushing the Black community to reform its culture.

BMS- Are you sure he has been standing on his own and not supported by organizations that do not have the best interest of the country at heart? Have you checked out some of the sites on Anonymous jones comments, don't just look at one for a second and dismiss it really check them out, its very enlightening.

Yes, I am sure.

AJ's sites are incredible conspiracy that makes the 9/11 truther's look like sane individuals.

I have and they are bunk.

If he's so extreme, then it's even more interesting that there are Conservative Republicans supporting him, like Susan Eisenhower or former National Review publisher Wick Allison, or Republican party fundraisers Wilbur O. Colom and James W. Parkinson. Of course, Democratic figures support Obama, but even conservative Democrats like Sam Nunn.

Good for them, also I heard how the life of Caroline Kennedy was turned by Obama.

The point is that we in the middle class don't trust him.

We don't trust Biden, before and now.

Obama was on the top of the hill, he had the elections in his pocket and what's happening? An old US Senator (I don't like US Senators for President) is in a tight race. Don't tell me that this is racism. I know college kids that were enthusiastic about Obama, we like him. However, just the last month the same group visited us and Obama is not now their choice.

For having a formidable staff, for having supporters ready to "eat alive" anyone that say something not flattering about Obama, his energy is coming down and his speeches doesn't have any quality now, he sounds like a robot.

How do I know? Because I watch/listen all the politicians selling their manure.

I don't believe in Polls but it's not very encouraging for the Obama's camp.

we in the middle class don't trust him

Who elected you spokesperson for the middle class, determined0a1? I'm middle class and I don't recall giving you permission to speak for me. I trust Obama.

those people MUST vote with their head,not out of spite....we all lose,including themselves..give the man a chance.i don't want to go back of 4 more years of oppression.
We as democrat must stand together.....if they don't vote for him,they are not true democrats as you stated janice....your posting is right on.i'm 45 from the SW U.S hispanic man w/some college,x-military.
'Together we stand,divided we fall'

if a Hillary supporter votes for McCain/Palin, they are voting not for a president but against a black man.

I don't agree with you completely, janice-376027, but unfortunately there are probably some individuals who fit the bill you describe. We'll just have to work harder to help Obama overcome that kind of prejudice.

P.S. Just so you know my demographic -- middle aged, Southern, white guy; Democrat but former Republican.

P.P.S. Obama-Biden 08!

Here is a 62 year old, white woman, from the deep South, whose parents were members of KKK (They later altered a lot of their views.) and I have been an Obama supporter since the primaries as well. The times they are a changin'. Problem is some people take longer to change than others.

some people take longer to change than others

And for some of these, this will finally be the year to change!

anon

Could you cite some source for what you allege? Where has he said he would dismantle the military? He would like to be able to offer financial help for college to young people who will serve in one capacity or another. He has voted for the troops and veterans consistently, something your candidate has not done.

"Why would you vote for murderer who wants to dismantle our military defenses?" Where are you getting your information from is it from Palin . You know she can see Russia from her state so she has foreign relationship experience.

Janice We are SISTERS. You are right on the mark. Me, 50 year old black woman, live in a NE big city, some higher education, TRUE DEMOCRAT and OBAMA supporter since the primaries.

Janice, By reproductive freedom for women what do you mean, No one tells you you can't reproduce, but if you do decide to make a baby you do not have the right to Murder. So therefore No one is against reproduction.

Beverly,

Abortion is not Murder. Murder is a legal term, and by law, Abortions that take place prior to the baby's viability outside the womb of the mother is not murder.

When you deliberately kill a living being it is murder. life begins at conception, if someone does not want to concieve they have options, Abortion is not an option it is a choice to murder.

You are placing your religious views on others.

Legally, life begins at viability.

I am personally pro life and rejoice when someone chooses to have a baby that they had not planned for. But if you think women have options that are even close to the same as the rights they have with Abortions, you are very mistaken.

For an abortion, a woman has 100% decision making ability. The father has no say.

If however a woman chooses to have the baby because they believe as you or I do, and then give the child away at birth, they have to get the father to sign off on it. What is the big deal you say? My cousin, who was raised by a deeply religious family who can be considered a hard right conservative religious family (they even believe in young earth creationism), became pregnant when she was a junior in high school.she did the right thing and decided to give the baby up for adoption. She did all the leg work and found a nice Christian family with the means to raise her child. The looser father decided that he did not want to give the child up for adoption and now my cousin has to raise this girl. The father has not paid child support or seen his daughter since she was born.

If you want to make Adoption a viable option, then you need to get laws changed so that, at the very least, women who are not married can decide to give the baby up for adoption prior to giving birth with out the father's consent.

Life begins at the time of conception, when the two cells become conjoined and become one, this is the point to which the cells inside the ova begin to divide that is the creation of life.

abortion is murder......if a woman get pregnant has a baby you have a daughter/son, if a woman gets pregnant has an abortion your daughter/son is dead.

abortion is not a means of birth control. There are other ways to keep from getting pregnant.

AJ,

stop the lies. He voted against a bill that would have changed the language of a law that already protected babies that survived abortions.

That is not voting against saving babies that survive abortions. It is disgusting that you have to lie to argue against voting for the guy.

BB and Beverly,

I pointed out the legal term murder does not mean what you think it means.

You have a religious view on the issue, not a legal or even medical view on it. Stop pushing your religious views onto others through authoritarian measured enacted by the state.

An opinion blog is your freaking source?

My sources are the Law books of the state of Illinois, the proposed bill that Obama voted Present on, and his words as to why he voted present on it.

The FACT that voting against the bill would not have ended protection of babies that survive abortions marks what you are saying a lie.

Avoiding the names running through my head,

There was a law already on the books and in effect that protected babies taht survived an abortion. This was an amendment to that law

DO you understand the simple idea I have pointed out to you?

Let me make your fallacies in reasoning more apparent to you.

McCain voted against a bill that would have helped to protect small children from pedophiles. By your reasoning, he is fine with pedophilia.

Until all of the orphans in this country are adopted, those who would prohibit someone else from getting an abortion are hypocrites of the worst kind.

But your minds are made up and you're comfortable in your righteousness even though you continue make false statements:

Why would you vote for murderer who wants to dismantle our military defenses?

Where do you people get this stuff? Source please?

Very few people are aware that he wants to disarm America, basically making us all sitting ducks with missles pointed right at our heads. ...his Muslim faith and how he says he will stand with the Muslims til the end

By the way, Fox News is NOT a source.

Beverly by your definition of life that would mean that a cancerous tumor is life. The cells unite but have to become more organized before they become an actual feuts. Early on the cells may never actually get organized to become anything. Many times the cells will unite and for one reason or another they do not create a fetus and are sluffed out of the woman during her next menstration cycle.

The moment you take a pregnancy test, what is said, I am pregnant. That means a baby....People who abort do not want a baby. So it is taking a life.

Yes, to have a tumor removed a person doesn't have to go through the supreme court. A tumor can't live outside of a body and neither can a fetus. If you take the emotion out of the issue and look at it from a purely scientific view it is very easy to decide that people should have the only and final decision on what to do with their own body.

But do you welcome a tumor, does a tumor turn into a human life? Human life is what is aborted, therefore when you abort human life you have murdered another human being.

Abortions are done for wholly selfish reasons and not taking responsibility for your actions....no wonder Obama supports it...

Government is also not supposed to govern on emotion, hence the separation of church and state. A woman's body is hers alone and you and the government should have nothing to do with it. The facts should be all that is relevant. A non-viable fetus is nothing more than a parasite technically speaking. Which I know sounds crass and un-feeling but doesn't make it less true. There is no place for this issue in government. If you want to argue about it at church go ahead. I personally do not like the idea of abortion at all but will not stick my nose into someone else's business. I will also not tell you who to have sex with. I will also not tell you what church to go to. I will not tell you cannot speak freely on sites like these or any other place. I will not tell you that you are required to enlist in the armed services. There is a very long list of things that I will not tell you can't do, but then again I am one of the few that believes in the constitution of the United States.

"a baby deserves the same freedoms and rights"....once the baby is viable.... I agree with you. Look, we will never agree. Roe v Wade is the law so there is no sense in arguing. Abortion is legal.

Government is also not supposed to govern on emotion,

I guess you did not watch the hearings today then.

Idiot Senators trying to milk emotion.

Let's not stop at prayers, but add action to it -- volunteer, donate, register voters, help get the vote out!

Prayers,along with action...doesn't hurt. I'm attending a rally tommorrow to do just that!
I feel you ,brother................................

You go, R45GT!

and so do you...fortunately you get collapsed pretty quickly ...

Yeaaaah!!!Gooooo team!!!!

Jonesy,
What list are you reading from? Did being born make you a hater? dang dude!!
are you burning an effigy of Obama right now? go see a counselor,pronto before it's to late!! Just trying to help you....................

Why should i worry? enlighten all of us with the facts........................

R45GT...Let me get this straight. You want to 'hire' this guy, based on the fact that he's articulate and charismatic? You've never run a business before, have you. Usually, people hire based on the content of the resume. Not how well they read a teleprompter.

Obama claims 'change'. I hear a lot of generalities from you, but I'm not seeing any specifics regarding what 'change' he proposes that you support.

He's got a law school degree. How is having another lawyer in Washington 'change'?
His running mate is a 36 year veteran of the Washington establishment. How is that 'change'?

What are his qualifications to get 'hired' for this position?

anon 8.4

American Heritage dictionary

Lair - den or swelling of a wild animal, den or hideway or resting place; a couch.

Liar - one that tells lies.

The only one being called out by major newspapers and fellow republicans for lying is McCain.

Murderer - interesting, you are pro-life except when it comes to sending our troops off to fight a pre-emptive war where our casualties are great, to say nothing of the innocent Iraqi women and children who have died.

Radical Muslim - prove it

Oppressor? again, prove it

Socialist - as in bailing out large financial institutions, lenders and insureance companies with poor, greedy policies? Corporate socialism?

You call those facts?...just give it up.

No wonder you want to be anonymous...lmao!

Let me get this straight. You want to 'hire' this guy, based on the fact that he's articulate and charismatic? You've never run a business before, have you. Usually, people hire based on the content of the resume. Not how well they read a teleprompter.

Well yes, it's better then hiring a someone who isn't especially if they are going to represent 300 million people.

Usually, people hire based on the content of the resume.

Exactly, that's why we want an articulate, charismatic, intelligent person running the country instead of someone who keeps saying things like "Fool Me Once, Won't Get Fooled Again", or "We need an energy bill that encourages consumption.", or "Rarely is the questioned asked: Is our children learning?"

So yeah I'll take the articulate guy for $100 please Alex.

You call those facts?...just give it up.

For real. Patisan blog posts from a house sitter? Come on man, get real!

..

KC77...You are aware that Bush isn't running, right?

And regarding an energy policy that encourages consumption:
You would prefer that your taxes finance alternative energy production such as ethanol, bio-diesel and wind farms, but no one uses them? Are you aware of the laws of supply and demand? Basic economics 101?

I'm a little freaked out here. If I'm reading you right, you want a president that's charismatic, regardless of their stance and you want the alternative energy industry to wind up in the same mess as the current financial industry.

WOW.

Facts just don't help some people see the truth.

You can say that again!

you'd see they were not all blogs.

Let's see:

anti abortion hyperbole, a message board post, then a blog, then a blog post, whoops! an actual analysis from a conservative viewpoint (how'd that get in there?), followed by a (surprise!) blog post, then (again?!) a blog post!, and, oh look!, World net daily article, blatantly partisan, but perhaps the one piece of worthwhile criticism in your pile of trash, followed by (you guessed it!) a blog, and finally, you attempt to slip in one - taking the fascist planning by the Bush administration and trying to pin it on Obama. Nice try.

I guess you didn't think anyone would actually look at your links...

Oh, did I mention one of your sources is a house sitter?

You would prefer that your taxes finance alternative energy production such as ethanol, bio-diesel and wind farms, but no one uses them?

Sorry very incorrect. We don't but other countries definately do. Brazil comes to mind just about every vehicle runs on ethanol. Funny that a country with a quarter of the GDP of the US can move off of oil but we can't.

Are you aware of the laws of supply and demand?

Yes that's why we need to move off of oil. Not stick with it when prices are rising at the rate they are. That's common sense 101.
Also there isn't a single technology, be it electricity, the Internet, etc that wasn't pushed by our government first before mass acceptance. It's called leadership, not waiting around until gas is so expensive people can't get to work.

KC,
Make up your mind. You slammed the comment "We need an energy policy that encourages consumption" and now you are coming out in support of an energy policy that encourages consumption. Make up your mind.

Incidentally, the price of oil has been steadily falling as of late. They are at roughly $72/barrel as I type this. About 1/2 of where it was at 4 weeks ago. And that's even AFTER Hurricane Ike.

Your arguments are exceptionally weak.

The price of oil is falling because the hedge funds are dumping the massive amounts of oil and speculation in general on the commodity is ending on wall street. What is more telling is that the price of Gas has not fallen nearly as much which indicates a major gouging problem.

Behind,

The price of oil is falling based on supply and demand as well as speculators.

The price of gas is at the level that it is because 17 refineries are currently off line in the Gulf. As an Executive Search Consultant for the Heavy Transport Industry that builds these refineries, I'd be more than happy to debate this issue with you. Yes, there is gouging occuring.

These platforms are responsible for 25% of our refining capabilities for gasoline.

If were going to look at the refined product as the leading indicator, then we also need to address the price of diesel which has steadily dropped, along with the crude price. Diesel is not refined in the gulf. Only Gas.

I'm not really sure what your oint has to do with me correcting KC when he/she mistakingly stated that oil was currently rising.

No. Supply and Demand have not been a major factor in the oil market for a very long time. Speculation has driven the price as high as it went and the lack of speculation is what is causing it to fall. Oil is not a free market and thus is not subject to free market forces.

Anonymous Jones,

LOLOLOLOLOL. Please stay annonymous. LOLOLOLOL. We have heard all of this before about Senator Obama. Did you hear the one about Senator Obama being the Anti-Christ? You forgot that one! LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL.

Pat,

Make up your mind. You slammed the comment "We need an energy policy that encourages consumption" and now you are coming out in support of an energy policy that encourages consumption. Make up your mind.

No I'm not. You were talking about two different topics. One that no one uses ethanol, which I proved incorrect.

The other was supply and demand which was not apart of the alternative fuel argument. Looks like my argument was pretty strong since your retort was nothing more than hallucinogenic tirade.

However, I am going to ask you a very simple question. Try and stay on topic please. If supply and demand is making prices go up (simple economics 101 as you stated)., then why have prices fallen???

Demand hasn't gone down and supply has definitely not gone up as you've so clearly stated in your previous post.

Incidentally, the price of oil has been steadily falling as of late. They are at roughly $72/barrel as I type this. About 1/2 of where it was at 4 weeks ago. And that's even AFTER Hurricane Ike.

So why have gas prices fallen??

Since my arguments are "so weak" you should be able to answer this question easily.

As far as gas rising...care to compare last year with this year's average??? I wasn't talking about comparing two months out of 12. I'm talking about year on year.

R45, Obama offers the best for the country if your looking for socialism, marxism and facism.

Beverly,

Marxism and Fascism are diametrically opposed ideologies. You can not be both.

What you are doing is tossing out labels that you see as negative and you do not even know what they really mean.

I disagree with you BMS, Fascism is emphasizing nationalism and often racism. Marxism is exploitation of the masses by a dominate class. a class struggle has been the main agency of historical change, a capitalistic system. Socialism is the stage following capitalism in the transition to communism. All of these are part of the Obama agenda.

Beverly,

Fasicm has a nationalistic component, but it is also a much deeper political philosophy.

Marxism is not the exploitation of the masses, try reading the philosophy some time.

Socialism is an economic philosophy where a community pays for and owns things that benefit the community.

While I do not disagree with your disdain for Fascism and Marxism, you really need to understand them a lot more than what you have shown your knowledge of them to be.

As for Socialism, you have pidgin holed it into where it fits in the Marxist philosophy, yet It can be applied to any political situation. Using Socialism, or parts of it does not mean you are progressing to a Stalinist regime.

Stop thinking in such narrow ways Beverly.

I suffer from what I accuse Beverly of? Excuse me, but it is her knowledge of the things she speaks on that needs to be broadened, not mine. Disagreement on an issue is not cause for being accused of narrow mindedness.

AJ, you ignoring facts to perpetuate lies is repugnant.

I am not a partisan of the facts and where ever they lead and I find the murder of the facts by you and your conservative ghouls to be worthy of the last circle of hell.

I am putting you on ignore because I can't stand dealing with a bald face liar.

BMS, I'm sorry you think I am not intelligent like you, but if you would kindly look up the definition to Socialism, fascism and Marxism you will see I am correct and it is you who has made the intellectual blunder.

I've not seen any of you who keep trying to call me a liar and "repugnant" to provide any kind of sources you deem so "worthy" that supposedly discredits my sources on any one point I've made.

Uh-huh. "Show me proof that Obama isn't a space alien!"

Nice try. Assertions have to be backed with proof. You haven't provided any. Back to the drawing board.

Uh-huh. "Show me proof that Obama isn't a space alien!"

You cannot prove a negative. If you want to use logic, take a basic class in logic.

@Pat N & BMS regarding the price of oil. From the AP today 9/22:
#8.27

NEW YORK - Oil prices spiked more than $25 a barrel Monday — the biggest one-day price jump ever — as anxiety over the government's $700 billion bailout plan, a weak dollar and an expiring crude contract ignited a dramatic rally.

Light, sweet crude for October delivery jumped as much as $25.45 to $130 a barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange before falling back to settle at $120.92, up $16.37.

I just wanted to point out, regardless of where oil is "today", it's price is volatile.

The truth hurts don't it Tom. I wish all of us could fail in school and still be nominated to the highest position in this countries government. I think Obama has a law degree and was president of his class. I may be wrong because I'm ignorant with my two master degrees.

Tom, George Bush was a miserable student and a total failure as a President. Isn't it time we started voting for smart people to lead the country. I think it's time to end our romance with incompetence. Brains make a difference.

Mr. McCain certainly doesn't have those credentials.......he's even admitted he has not a clue of the economy,this man has demonstrated his ineptness of a sound mind,mental lapses,and watch Palin on TV(Gibson interview) podium speeches,it's embarrasing. i almost feel sorry for those idiots..........................and onther thing,how many times was McCain absent from the senate...most of the time(except on HIS special interest votes)

We have paid the price for GW's smarts..................Partying sounds more fun to him,typical college animal house guy. the people who voted for him are even more incompetent.

What freedom are you giving away . Are we going to become communists. Please stay anonymous.

It's an old cliche, but what do you call the doctor who graduated last in his/her class? "Doctor"

Not the doctor i would see if i knew. Or Dr Kevorkian

you tell me your the one who said it.

OK so let me get this straight, voting present over 100 times in the state senate is representative of his radical and sinister agenda? Wouldn't it make more sense if he had a radical and sinister agenda he would have voted to support that agenda? The members of the IL state senate have said again and again a present vote basically shows that the senator does not disagree with the bill in its entirety, it stipulated there are items in the bill they object to and due to those items they cannot vote to support the passage as is.

The links a virus

George,
Welcome to the paranoia express. The link takes you to another post in this thread. If it's a virus...you're already infected just by hanging out here and posting. Does this mean you'll be going away now? Or does it just mean you'd rather not be bothered by those pesky facts that don't mesh with your version of reality?

Tom, you are right, I notice when you ask a liberal a question all you really get for an answer is distortion of the question, and no facts. When you ask a liberal a question all you get is anger because he knows you are right.

try speaking in specifics Beverly. vague accusations are useless.

BMS What are you my tail?

no, I was just following the new responses.

Blacks support Obama because he is black?...ABSURD! Where are the numbers? Kerry got 88% of the black vote. How many more are there!?!

truly times are changing, if not a Black Candidate would not be where he is today. It is a great time in our nation. That said, there is still issues in this country. It has been voiced that the younger generation is more accepting of this change. But that older generations are struggling with the idea and talking themselfs into believing it isnt race that stopping them from voting for Obama. But it is the policy's?? Really, When so far time after time McCain has show his lack of restraint and fly off the handle. I'll fire Cox (scapgoat). He will tell you he knows little about the economy, then act like he knows everthing. I am white 61 and ready and willing to pass the ball to someone other then who we have had for 8 years.

I think McCain came out a little twisted after he checked out of the Hanoi Hilton..........a bitter man.

If McCain is so smart, he should know that the president couldn't fire Cox. Someone must have 'reminded' him of that and in his next speech he said that Cox should resign. I agree the reps will always find a scapegoat in spite of the 'responsibility' they require from the rest of the population.

Why would blacks vote republican?thats a very inclusive party....they've always shun them.
i wouldn't go to a place were im not wanted........

I think McCain invented a lot of his story because he kept his mouth shut until most of his fellow Pow's were dead. So that there would not be a lot of them available to contradict what ever lies and embellishment;s he told

I have no idea what that means...

I don't recall seeing a black man or woman up for grabs during Kerry's run. Did you?

Take a deep breath...

The topic was blacks who vote for color...

The point was 88% supported the white guy last time...

Conclusion: percentage can only improve slightly...result negligible...

Ergo, blacks must vote Democratic for another reason. DUH

ABD....Assuming there were a black individual running 'last time'...do you truly believe Kerry would have gotten 88% of the black vote?

They would only have come from the democratic party...like this one.

My point is this cannot be measured since there is no available model. If a Black Republican ran and got 88%, I would be the first to cite the obvious racism.

I agree EXCEPT that you MUST have some level of intelligence in order to figure out how to work with people and understand what the issues are and what needs to be done to better them. Unfortunately neither McSame or Palin possess either of these necessary traits or any qualities that will help us in these horrible times.

We have had non-intelligence in the white house for 8 yrs . Look at this country now. Lets try someone with some intelligences this time.

Good one george!!!

unless he is half black is the way a lot of whites think I mean if he was all white they could vote for him think about that and just how silly they sound.

I think you are wrong, Tom. Concentration, study, analytical ability, the ability to communicate in a concise manner, recognition of evidence, the ability to evaluate and set an agenda and creativity are all elements of intelligence. The desire to lead is important. The ability to get the attention of the public is important. However, the latter two elements without intelligence is the definition of poor leadership.

if you are saying that the idiot and the dunce should run America following the cheerleader you are as silly and stupid as they are.

You ought to be able to think in order to lead....who's going to follow an idiot? alot of people did 4 years ago...your not as smart as i thought Tom.......

What Muslim extremist ties .Do you think the FBI would let someone be a candidate for president with ties like that. Stop reading the tabloids

george,
Jones has anger issues,don't play into it..........we know better. i didn't see a prayer rug or the koran in his possesion,did you?

Oh THOSE facts!...lmao...oh, you were serious?...

what freedom are you giving away?

You have the freedom to pay for this war that Bush started to find WMD. You have the freedom to pay to bail out the banks for this housing mess. Do you want 4 more years of freedom.

"We still don't like black people," said John Clouse, 57, reflecting the sentiments of his pals gathered at a coffee shop in Somerset, Ohio.

Well, John Clouse at 57, when your black heart fails remember to not get a pace maker. He shouldn't be using a radio, TV and anything requiring an electrical capacitor. He hates blacks but uses the African American contributions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bio of Inventor Otis Boykin: African-American Invented the Pacemaker. In fact, Otis Boykin invented twenty-eight electronic devices in all.

If you visit the United States Patent and Trademark Office, and look up patent number 2,972,726, you'll find Boykin's first invention. Boykin received his first patent on June 16, 1959. It was for a wire precision resistor. This resistor can be found in computers, radios, and televisions.

Next, Boykin invented an electrical resistor. He received U.S. patent number 2,972,726 for it on February 21, 1961. Then, on June 22, 1965, Otis Boykin patented his electrical capacitor and the method for making the same. It is U.S. patent number 3,191,108.

I see it regularly

I am actually shocked by stories like this, and scratching my head wondering where these people are. Among white people I know, confessing some racial prejudice would be looked at like....I don't know, confessing to having sex with dead animals, or being a neo-Nazi. It just isn't done. It is just about the #1 taboo of all taboos. So I don't get this.

I have had the experience of someing confiding in me a racial hatred, assuming that we are secretly "in cahoots" just because I am also white. But that has happened like 2 times in 40-some years. So...where do these people live exactly???

Lazarillo, I live in the old Confederacy and have throughout my 60 years. I have seen overt racism throughout my life and continue to see it. It is less openly talked about than it was when I was a boy and a young man, but it is still exhibited especially by people around my age group to each other. I think that what the survey shows is that even among those who do not express open hostility there are underlying prejudices which control their thought processes and they are less likely to give a person of color fair consideration. This does not surprise me.

Darkwood-

I was raised in the era of "colored" on bathroom doors, "Colored" over water fountains. I didn't like it then, frankly didn't understand why it had to be that way, and I sure wouldn't like it now. I was raised also by a Parent who today would be called a racist.

I am not voting for Obama because he is BLACK. I am not voting for him for numerous other reasons. First of all I don't know who he is and exactly where he comes from. I don't like his Friends" so with his choice of friends, I don't trust him. I don't even agree with him on any of his issues.

BB, you don't have to defend your vote here. Individual votes are made for a variety of reasons. The article is about how racism is still alive and well, if a little below the surface to a statistically significant extent. If your personal experience makes you think that this not true then your investigation should be into how good the science was in the survey. From what the article said it looked pretty good

Darkwood-

I wasn't really defending my vote, as much as saying I don't hold the color of his skin against him.

No matter this is a vote about RACE, the black voter registration has jumped higher in my state and all over the country. We have a local talk show in my town and a local person called in and stated that she is voting for Obama because he is black and said to the host like you are voting for McCain because he is White. The Host told her that he hasn't stated who he is voting for, so she just assumed.

I don't think the Election should be about RACE or Gender, but unfortunately it is.

Its hard to change a narrow minds,i commend you for trying.........hang in there!! i got your back...

There are two schools of thought for retraining a bigot. It is similar to training a horse. There is old school which is a 2x4 up the side of the head or new school which is closer to horse whisperer. Neither are very successful, but the former at least gives some self satisfaction.

The closet racist don't count it's evident where Republican leadership and Republican Policy's have led America and the fact of the matter is that the minority's will survive what ever economic downturn that the country is going to experience and many in better shape than a lot of the closet racist whites because when thing are bad the whites will suffer more than the blacks and other minorities who don't own very much anyway.

mkoe I'm with you too!!! I don't waste a lot of time dealing with people who only see the world one way because they will not change even when they LOSE THEIR HOMES, HAVE TO RIDE THE BUS because of high gas prices, etc. These people want to be stuck in a tunnel and when the train comes and runs them over, you can't feel a lot of empathy for them. They are the very ones who'll be living in their cars if McSame/Ms. Moose of 1984 get in!!!....that is if their car hasn't been " repoed"!!!

There's no simple answer to that question. It's hard to believe that people will put race or gender ahead of what is affecting their pocketbooks. I have an idea but wonder where those who are concerned about the race of a candidate fall socio-economically. Do these people know anyone of another race or are their impressions formed by what they see on TV or in the movies? All black people are not violent, nor are all white people non-violent. People are people regardless of color.

Where I live 99.9% of the population is white; same percentage for welfare recipients. 3/4 are republican, a few independents, th rest democrats or non-voting. Average income 32,000/year. Nearly all are Christian or a derivation thereof but not necessarily tolerant nor inclusive. Most arrests follow along with the percentages and the crimes are as violent per capita as anywhere else. There is racism because many have never met or interacted with anyone that is different from themselves. Much of the racism is pure ignorance - simply because they are ignorant of anything other than their surroundings. That's what we're up against. If we didn't travel and get out of here once in awhile, I would very quickly lose what little faith I have left in the so-called average American.

mkoe, If we believe this poll, 30% of Democrats won't vote for Sen Obama because of race. I think that the stone wall you are up against is not just built from Republicans.

Darkwood, you sure seemed to be obsessed with bigotry, Are you sure your not a little bit racist?

Someone who has lived on the receiving end of Hard Racism has the right to talk about it with out having to suffer the comments from those who would attempt to turn it around on them Beverly.

In other words I'm white so I cannot speak of racism?

No,

but calling someone a racist because of the resentment they feel due to being on the receiving end of hard racism and segregation is kind is kind of like calling a sexually abused boy "gay".

You can say what ever you like, but certain things are distatseful and should be avoided.

why did the Latinos move to Compton as opposed to some white city I will tell you it's because there was less racism from the Blacks than those lily white city's full of lily white racist.

That is my sentiment exactly vote the Party not the race, because voting the Race will put the Idiot and the Dunce in charge, and all of us have seen what the Cheerleader did and is still doing.

Aalafalot, Get rid of those stinking republicans and make way for change, socialism, Marxism and fascism, What the world needs now.

I addressed your ignorance of political ideologies above so I will not comment again except to mention it.

NeoCons Right Wing Republicans want a Evangelical Christian Totalitarianism. Christian Fascism.

They want to replace the Constitution with The Bible. Teach Pseudo Science in Schools.

Dominionism: throuigh political action to influence or control over action secular civil government. This is popular among right wing Conservatives Republicans. Their goal is the US governed by preferred Evangelical/Born Again Christians through Biblical Law.

This is from Wikipedia -->Dominionism

Dominionism growing within Republican party.

AJ,

if you think conservatives are for the constitution, then you are lost and are completely unrecoverable.

The far Right Wing Conservatives are more so anti-Constitution, and Anti-Bill of Right and they want to burn the Declaration of Independence. They want to have Church and State as one entity.

They may say so on paper or in words, they want change the content to their twisted version of it.

The Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen guarantees freedom of religion, as long as religious activities do not infringe on public order in ways detrimental to society.

Let see, replace the Constitution with the Bible.

or change it to the following

The Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen guarantees freedom of evangelical Christina religion, as long as non-Evangelical religious activities do not infringe on public order in ways detrimental to Conservative Christian society.

Freedom of Religions is to right to practice any Religious or choose not to practice a Religion especially if it different from the base. Today, you have Right Wing Wackos want shove certain type of Christianity down everyone throat. Even Catholicism, Mormonism, Lutheranism and few other old school Christians are not considered Christians by many Evangelical base.

Going back to Race, you see many African American and other minorities practice Evangelical Christianity. Yet, it not good enough and even unwilling to relate. Thus Race is issue.
They want Blacks to be Oreos, Asians to be Bananas, Latinos to be Pinto Beans, and India Indians to be Coconuts-->Black, Yellow, Brown, Dark Brown on the outside and White in the Inside. Even that is not good enough.

BTW, There is a different between Today Republican Ideology then the Reagan or the Eisenhower version of Republicians. Today version of Republicans are more Anti-Bill of Rights, Anti-Constitution and hate the Declaration of Independence. Just look at many of Bush/Cheney actions in last 8 years plus various Religious Leaders like Robertson, Falwell, Dobson to name a few. The good thing some moderate Christians like Rick Warren realize their conservative counterparts are wacko. More Modern Christians are realizing, it best to work together with other faiths, other Christians and non-faiths rather than fight a cold war trying to convert everyone to one faith.

Going back to race, the people who not voting Obama because of race must realize the following:
Sooner or Later a person of color will be President and Vice President. One of them will be African American. You better adapt or die.

You both do realize this country was begun with a very strong conservative foundation. No wait, apparently you don't.

No, conservatives are more status quo. The Rebels, the Revolutionists, the Radicals, those that defied the king were FAR from conservative. They were very, very liberal.

The "conservatives" of that time were the loyalists, those that didn't want to break away from the Crown. Thomas Paine, Jefferson and Franklin et al were NOT conservatives, no matter what fairy tale history you'd like to cling to.

And by the way, what do you think "Creator" means here?

If they meant God, why didn't they use His name?

Not liberal the way YOU use the word. Check out the definitions and you may be surprised at how you've been misusing it. You have twisted it into a meaningless label that those of your ilk use to try and demean those you disagree with. You've turned it into and use it as a slur. Or have you and Limbaugh reached the conclusion that it means "socialist"? I don't see the word socialist anywhere in the definitions. But back to your original claim,

You both do realize this country was begun with a very strong conservative foundation. No wait, apparently you don't.

Again, no it wasn't. It was liberals just like today's liberals. 1. favorable to progress or reform, as in political or religious affairs. 2. (often initial capital letter) noting or pertaining to a political party advocating measures of progressive political reform. 3. of, pertaining to, based on, or advocating liberalism. 4. favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, esp. as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection of civil liberties. 5. favoring or permitting freedom of action, esp. with respect to matters of personal belief or expression: a liberal policy toward dissident artists and writers. 6. of or pertaining to representational forms of government rather than aristocracies and monarchies. 7. free from prejudice or bigotry; tolerant: a liberal attitude toward foreigners. 8. open-minded or tolerant, esp. free of or not bound by traditional or conventional ideas, values, etc. 9. characterized by generosity and willingness to give in large amounts: a liberal donor. 10. given freely or abundantly; generous: a liberal donation. 11. not strict or rigorous; free; not literal: a liberal interpretation of a rule. 12. of, pertaining to, or based on the liberal arts. 13. of, pertaining to, or befitting a freeman.

"...station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them..." Nature's God?? Why the qualifier, why not just God? There is a reason, and with a little research, I'm sure you'll figure it out.

So what do you mean by "liberal"? I pasted 13 definitions for you, NONE of them suffice? Maybe you're MISUSING the word. You think liberal means the opposite of the definitions?

I understand that, what you don't seem to understand is that is the opposite position of today's liberals.

You're smugness is showing, and yes, I guess I'm just a dummy because I don't seem to understand that you've hijacked the word to suit your own purpose, or you hold with the given definition, and feel that "today's liberals" are the opposite of what the word means?

It was never the intention that the United States should be or become a theocracy. As much as the radical fundamentalist religious right continues this push for a "Christian" nation, others will push back.

And unlike those you accuse of calling you a liar, I am not doing that. I think you fully believe what you're saying. I think you honestly believe that Obama is a "murderer", (without trial), and that he's going to "dismantle our military defenses"? I'm also sure you believe

"that he wants to disarm America, basically making us all sitting ducks with missles pointed right at our heads. ...his Muslim faith and how he says he will stand with the Muslims til the end"

And I believe here your bigotry is glaring. Again I ask you, as I did above, where do you find these things? (Fox News doesn't count).

You're never going to "change" my mind and I'm sure not going to change yours. What I am going to do is to continue to fight the fundamentalists who relish the idea of a Christian Theocracy.

Do you know how many times others have voted 'present,' or are you simply judging Obama from a raw number out of prejudice? And is it OK with you that McCain is the most absent senator around, missing votes even on legislation and issues that he himself called crucial?

it is the same as McCain not voting this year on his Senate Votes this year

Neither has Obama. What's your point? In case you haven't noticed, they are running for president.

Is this seriously the best you can do?

Neither has Obama.

Wrong again.

James perhaps you don't understand, Obama is not in school where you can say present, No legislative official says present during a vote...check it out..It shows he is not on his game he doesn't know what he should do, he is indecisive, he is not ready to lead this country.

plenty of legislators vote present. It is a valid vote and what it does is record that you were in the chamber and decided to abstain from the vote. There is no indecision in such a stance.

great point

First, please use the 'reply' button.

We are talking about Obama.

No, we are talking about how to properly judge someone's actions.

If 130 present votes is minimal in the Illinois Senate, would you be concerned? Have you bothered to find out?

If anyone could feed 10,000 with one loaf of bread and one fish, would we still be talking about Jesus today?

People's actions are only accurately judged against the record of normal behavior. Walking on water is insignificant if you are a water bug. It can change the world if you are the Son of God.

I feel your pain. I have two friends who are so uninformed, ignorant, and shallow, they make me wish that they would repeal women's suffrage. One of them still thinks Obama 's a Muslim cleric and the other one thinks that Palin should VP because of her religious opinions and gender. But then I cheer up and realize that there are others who really care about the issues.

So he possibly could get in, and we will know that race or because he's cute put him there, not because people think he will really change a thing!

So, according to you, Sheila-522981, and based on a conversation you allegedly had with two co-workers of yours, if Obama wins it will be because he is cute and black -- and that's it in a nutshell. Well, I'm sorry but that nutshell of yours is cracked! And you insult supporters of Obama with that anecdotal, simplistic, reductionist "story" of yours. Since you do not know me, I know you have absolutely no idea why I'm voting for Obama. So, let me share this anecdote with you -- I support Obama because in my opinion he is the best candidate to get us out of the mess we've been dragged in to by this awful Republican administration. ENOUGH!

hi Sheila-52...81; We all know in this world of fake Art, stolen Quotes and sullied Opinions, we can make up a STORY about our friend/she/co-worker...who (might) have made stupid remarks. I have NONE of your 'private' information--which MIGHT be deemed either True or/nor False. Why then would I comment on such presumed commentary??? Ha. Friends, Politicos, Country-persons, lend me your Facts or spare me your shaky contentions!

I've got to go, also. A good day to you, R45GT and all the rest!

OBAMA/BIDEN 08 OBAMA/BIDEN 08 OBAMA/BIDEN 08 OBAMA/BIDEN 08 OBAMA/BIDEN 08 OBAMA/BIDEN 08 OBAMA/BIDEN 08 OBAMA/BIDEN 08

P.S. OBAMA/BIDEN 08!

You want to criticize a whole race but dont want to be called a racist? interesting.

I'm with you...right after we discuss Irish, Asian, Jewish, German, Scottish, Welsh, Italian, Polish...

BTW what exactly is "black" culture, since the term itself involves no origins?

Thank you, Chello!

Cultural Literacy Minute: the "B" in Black should be capitalized.

Chello- Lots of people criticize "white people" "white America" "whiteness" which all refer to a race and you don't get upset about that.

GRC is correct, there are some really big problems in current black American attitudes and patterns of conduct that need to be addressed before many people are comfortable with the idea of a black administration.