Well, aside from the obvious.

Turns out he's a racist.

Like our friend Geraldine Ferraro, Nader is stuck in the past, and has certain expectations of a black politician:

There's only one thing different about Barack Obama when it comes to being a Democratic presidential candidate. He's half African-American," Nader said. "Whether that will make any difference, I don't know. I haven't heard him have a strong crackdown on economic exploitation in the ghettos. Payday loans, predatory lending, asbestos, lead. What's keeping him from doing that? Is it because he wants to talk white? He doesn't want to appear like Jesse Jackson? We'll see all that play out in the next few months and if he gets elected afterwards."

Let's look at his remarks a little more closely.

Hillary Clinton came into this race with virtually 100% name recognition, an ex-president husband, the support of women's groups and a nation full of Democrats who owed her family a favor.  She had apparent invincibility and a seemingly endless ability to raise money.  Moreover, as her surrogates so often remind us, she's white!

So, if Hillary Clinton is 150 earned delegates behind and has lost the popular vote when the superdelegates begin to weigh in, then how much affirmative action should Hillary Clinton receive from the superdelegates to put her ahead of Barack Obama?

This presidential race is very much like a college admissions process in which Clinton and Obama are competing to get the most points on the SAT's as well as their grade point averages and personal essays.  But if, after all of her obvious advantages, Clinton is still behind by 150 delegates and 800,000 popular votes when the admissions decision is made, how much affirmative action should Hillary Clinton receive to put her ahead of Barack Obama?  And why?

Have we really gotten to the point in America where a white candidates for the presidency can request and receive affirmative action on the basis of the fact that they are white?  That would certainly be a perverse and ironic twist in America's march toward color-blindness.  Where is Ward Connerly when he is most (for once) needed?

The fact is, Hillary Clinton came to this race with so many advantages in her favor that she doesn't deserve any extra affirmative action at all.  We need a strong president who wins on her own merits; not an affirmative action candidate who gets another leg up in spite of already having started out on top.

Let's see:

1) ask the superdelegates to overturn the will of the DEMOCRATIC PARTY voters.

2) ask the PLEDGED delegates to overturn the will of the voters in their states by voting for the OPPOSITE candidate they were pledged to vote for.

3) count the votes in non-contested primaries.

4) claim it is the popular vote, not the pledged delegates, that really count, thus disenfranchising every state that held caucuses instead of primaries (and thus had MUCH lower turnout).

Ways to Win That Are Worse Than Cheating
1) marginilize your African American opponent as "just" the Black candidate.

2) have your surrogates attack affirmative action.
this tactic ends up hurting women (the largest group of beneficiaries of affirmative action) more than anyone else.

3) attack Black Liberation theology.
thus harming the institutions that have done the most to uplift the African American community (as well as help the Democratic party): the Black churches.

4) pit Hispanics against African Americans.
divide and conquer

5) support the ReThug nominee over your Democratic opponent
"John McCain has certainly passed the Commander in Chief threshold, you'll have to ask Senator Obama if he has."

This nomination fight has proven without a doubt that there is absoutely nothing, no matter how shameful or hurtful to OUR OWN PARTY INTERESTS, that the Clinton's won't do to steal this nomination. the fact that she has stated openly that she should be the nominee even if Obama has won the most delegates and the most votes proves she doesn't care about the will of DEMOCRATIC PARTY voters, and is reason enough for ALL Democrats to deny her the nomination.

at some point, it becomes not the fault of the Clinton campaign, but of those who are blindly following her no matter how outrageous her actions and words are. we are at that point.

now is the time for the Clinton supporters to shake off their blind loyalty (a valued trait in ReThugs circles, but not for Dems) and Do The Right Thing and stand up and say that our nominee is chosen by OUR VOTERS, not party leaders. (the Democratic party is not the Kremlin.) and to vote for a progressive who can win the White House without tearing our party and the country apart.

     For the first time in American history being a black man is now an asset? Ok, for the first time outside of an athletic event being a black man is a plus. I have been black a long time and I have witnessed countless instances when being a black man has been a handicap of epic proportions. I can even attest to the fact that just having a "black sounding" name has been a detriment. Now, I am suppose to believe that being a black man is somehow the reason Barack Obama is leading the nomination for President of America? I wonder if the people who are saying this line even hear themselves. I would like for them to go and tell this to the many young black men that are incarcerated in our nations jails and prisons who won't even get the opportunity to vote in this historic election or tell it to the many young black men who are unemployed standing around the corners of our inner cities.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/article s/2008/01/the_battle_over_mocri.html

"""Come November, voters will decide more than half a million federal, state and local officeholders and ballot initiatives. Ninety-nine of these decisions will matter less than will the five civil rights initiatives that might be on the ballots in Arizona, Colorado, Nebraska, Oklahoma and Missouri.

If the initiatives qualify for those states' ballots, all probably will pass. But the initiatives must surmount ferocious opposition from defenders of racial preferences, such as the politicians who administer and benefit from Missouri's racial spoils system. The crux of the Missouri Civil Rights Initiative (MoCRI) would amend that state's Constitution to say: "The state shall not discriminate against, or grant preferential treatment to, any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in the operation of public employment, public education or public contracting."

Similar language has been approved by voters in California (in 1996), Washington state (1998) and Michigan (2006). California's initiative passed 55 percent to 45 percent even though opponents outspent supporters 13-1. Washington's initiative won 58-42 against 10-1 spending. Michigan's initiative won 58-42 although supporters were outspent 5-1. Those spending disparities understate the initiatives' disadvantages because in each state, opponents were assisted by the "diversity" industry that administers racial preferences in the public and private sectors. """

According to
http://civilliberty.about.com/od/ussenat ors/p/barack_obama.htm

Obama strongly supports Affirmative Action

Now I generally support Affirmative Action as a way to expand opportunities to everyone and so does Hillary Clinton.

The point of this dairy is to give examples of how this country will not be united by anyone. This is politics. It is war without bloodshed.  The alternative is bloodshed,see other countries.

Obama supporters please grow up! and vote Hillary.

I am working on a book that I believe is very relevant to this forum and was hoping that you all could look into it and provide some feedback. I represent the book, "Why We'll Win: Left Edition" by Malcolm Friedberg, which explores the constitutional contentions behind hotpoint issues such as abortion, the pledge of allegiance, gun control, and gay marriage along with perspectives written by liberal leaders.

The book is written from a bipartisan perspective with the aim to inform the average political junkie of the legal and constitutional arguments that are made and heard within the confines of the Supreme Court. For instance, the chapter on abortion draws the distinction that the constitution lays out (and the courts have specified) between the state rights to protect the unborn and a woman's right to choose. While, of course, there is no easy mediation between the two sides, this book is designed to make readers aware of the LEGAL contentions behind the debate and prepare them to argue their case.

I thought that this book would be of interest to this community. What do you all think?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=63OHMLf9w Uc

As a white male I recognize the importance it is to have an identity as a human being. Malcolm X is a man I highly admire, and he discussed how black people were forced over here from Africa. He acknowledged that black people in America were Africans trapped in America who were never given rights as a human being. In this video he questions who are you? He says that black peoples last names are not Jones or Smith because that was their slavemaster's last name. He brings to light the struggles that black people had to endure to the point that they do not know where they came from. I believe that the more we understand each other then the more open society can be about things that people are uncomfortable to discuss. People become uncomfortable to talk about race, politics, or any personal matters with people they do not know well. If we can understand different cultures, environments, and the mind of each person then I believe we can realize our identity as human beings.

Many white people do not even know the name Malcolm X. This is just one of many barriers that separates people. Many white people do not seek to understand a non-white culture; they feel too comfortable with their own people. Sadly, my recognition towards the struggles and knowledge of the black community is higher than most white people. This is why I advocate for affirmative action because we need a balanced field in the workplace and in society. People do not know enough about each other and we must be more diverse. The reason affirmative action must be implemented is to help fight racism and not leave people behind. We do not have an equal society and until we reach that point then we need to have things such as affirmative action.

I want to raise the bar for white people to acknowledge the non-white communities. Being around people you hang with everyday will not expand the dimension of your mind to understand people. It is important for the U.S. to not be colorblind because it means that they are blind towards people of color. Small towns and cities are on the opposite sides of life that creates a miscommunication amongst each other. When you are around more people then you get a larger impression about society in which you live. I ask to understand people from all walks of life where you understand the thought in rural and city America. We must identify each other as human beings in a society that will work for all of us regardless where we come from and to help heal any negativity which may exist between one another.
 

The Republicans are still supporting Gonzales.  The question is "Why?"  The stench coming off this guy is absolutely nauseating.

If this was a democratic administration, he would have been gone on Friday, when his lies to Congress were revealed by his own emails.

So, why does Bush retain him?