Doug, you could not be more correct in your Rant! Last night on Countdown, Olberman showed a sign from a church that read "Osama - Obama, what's the difference?"

I live in the middle of mid-America retired seniors and the racism is rampant! Clinton is lapping it up! The White Evangelicals want a very white President and even McCain is starting to shine! Yuck!

If you're a stupid, illiterate, gun-totin' white hick you probably voted for Hillary.

So how come 22% of the voters in Fayette County voted for Obama? I'm guessing they didn't pay any attention, just went with the first name on the ballot.

Doug is one of the few American journalists who can write copy like the British journalists. A tongue-in-cheek, verbal knife in the back, very intellectual & current events sense of humor.
Like the difference between the classic comedians and todays in your face comedy - the old Mae West line "is that a pistol in your pocket..."

The late Phil Ochs was right in his song "I'm a Liberal."

Holy cow! Doug, I know you can't stand Hillary, and it's all good, but I am personally sick of the race card.
Yep, there a people who won't vote for Obama because he is black or Hillary because she is a woman. The late Congresswoman Shirley Chisolm was asked which was the hardest in work life, being a woman or being black. She said by far, being a woman is tougher.
People have reason to be a little wary of Obama. First off, he is pretty new to the national stage. What people really know about him, is that he came out of Chicago, made a great speech at the DNC convention and was a state senator.
The "elitist" comments were not well received. Never mind the preacher which had largely blown over until Jerry Wright decided to go on Bill Moyers.
I grew up in a Christian home (which is now an advertisement for stupidity), and my father owned guns. Growing up in the Great Depression, he used a gun to obtain dinner. I do not own a gun, as I am not a very good shot. I still attend church and my faith is vital to me. I don't consider myself bitter or racist.
When I was in a position of hiring people, I hired people of color. One was a convicted felon I thought deserved a chance. She didn't disappoint.
Obama needs thicker skin if he wants in politics. When running for the Senate, his minions sued to have his opponents sealed, rather explosive divorce papers released. The story came out and his opponent bowed out of course.
He has a history of suing his opponents off the ballot, so of course it is no surprise to me that his surrogates are calling for Hillary to drop out.
I am not voting for Obama, because the little bit that I know about him, simply does not inspire me.
At 46, I am pretty comfortable in my own skin and make my own decisions. If it makes you happy to call Christians ignorant bigots, by all means, go right ahead. You wear it on your own soul. I don't.

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm! I wonder if Doug could be more specific and cite precise quotes, or language that back up the following comment:

"...it should not surprise anyone that Hillary Rodham Clinton would use racism in her anything goes quest for the Democratic Presidential nomination."

There's quite a bit of journalistic rhetoric zipping back and forth throughout the web, radio and television. I realize it's all part of the profession, however, once in a while it would be nice to see some of it backed up by specific facts.

I have a lot of respect for CHB and believe it's truly a wonderful place to exchange thoughts and perceptions. I also appreciate its efforts at neutrality, that's why I suggest when charges of racism are levied they should have a bit more meat behind them.

How about : I ain't no ways tired. Seems to me hillies assertion that shes as black as ya'lls is as racist as it gets. Maybe I'm off base, but were I black it would smack of pandering and condescension. For the record, I'm cauc/50's and look to see character before color/race enters the equation.

63 % of PA voters report Hillary is not trustworthy.
86 % of PA voters report race was of no importance in their vote
55% of PA voters chose Hillary
55% of PA voters seem pretty cozy with lying

Spot-on commentary as usual Doug Thompson concerning racism in AmeriKa. Sometime back you wrote that Obama won't make it to the Whitehouse for this reason alone and it seems you are calling the outcome right.

There's a chance that he might just get the nomination, but my concern is that racism will be his undoing in the general election. McCain who definitely has "redneck" appeal if not anything else going for him will more than likely triumph. Obama is black, Hillary is a woman, so McCain is our only viable "manly" choice...no?! :-s

I do feel Obama wastes too much time apologizing and explaining his position everytime the Clinton machine goes on the attack. He needs to put them on ignore and focus on developing a solid platform. The more Hillary's is put on ignore the more she'll look impotent with her pandering to America's redneck, racist constituency.

Little do these rednecks realize that if they give her the power, they'll be the first to go in the gun roundups if she has her way. Hillary just like her husband are both phony as a blue three dollar bill. They will sell us out for just a few bucks, yuan, euros, or rupees more if they have the chance to do so.

Carl Nemo **==

NY native
Doug - you have sunk to a new low.

Stars and Bars? Doug, as the people here in rural Western NC say to me frequently, "you ain't from around here, are you?

The Confederate flag that all your neighbors wear proudly on their underwear is the Confederate Battle Flag, not the Stars and Bars. YCLIU in wikipedia.

I think that having Obama as a presidential candidate may well end up splitting the Democratic Party back along the lines of the "real" Democrats and the Dixiecrats of some 60 years ago. But this time the split is a tad more likely to be permanent, at least in my opinion.

Ted

Doug you claimed:"Exit polls from Tuesday's Pennsylvania primary show nearly one-fifth of those who went to the polls admit racism determined how they voted"

Did that 22% include the 90% of blacks who obviously voted based on skin color only for Obama????? I do not believe that the overwhelming number of whites voting are at all racist. In fact the whites have showed far less racism than the blacks. While some 90 to 92 % of blacks have voted for Obama, he has also received much more than 8 to 10 % of the white vote while Hillary has been getting only 8 to 10 % of the black vote. If Obama were an experienced candidate......if his resume compared to Hillary's, then we could say the whites were racist but in this case Hillary's resume is much stronger than Obama's. Most whites are voting for the stronger resume while almost all blacks have been voting Obama based on skin color............that is racist!!!! They are voting for President of the USA based on skin color alone and cry racism every time anyone questions anything about Obama. Obama's Church, his associates and Michelle's ...are all very important to educated voters looking at his character since he has nothing much in that resume compared to Hillary Clinton. AND I love how you think what the media told you to think ....you said "She won because the bulk of her appeal comes from the less-educated, the less-tolerant and the less-intelligent among us. If you're a stupid, illiterate, gun-totin' white hick you probably voted for Hillary." Do a reality check hon....the least educated group in America are the blacks. Perhaps that is why some portion of them are voting on skin color only, they can't read resumes. But their lack of education is not a good reason to elect an inexperienced black man that plays the race card to get elected.

Sure Republicans would rather run against Hillary because they don't want to deal with the racism crys and race baiting the Obama's do. With Hillary we will debate the issues, like Iraq, universal healthcare, jobs, fixing NAFTA or enforcing trade agreements ect ect.

Interesting to see, once again, the suggestion that Obama wins because of racist voting. I'm thinking about Minnesota, North Dakota, Wisconsin, Kansas, Virginia . . .

Nice rant, Bubba!

Ya' know, Doug's argument is almost impossible to prove or disprove, statistically. There are at least two factors, here: demographics, by state and racism, by state, which obviously determine Obama's (or Hillary's) support group. These two variables tend to be mutually cancelling, i.e. states with more blacks probably have more anti-black sentiment, and vice versa. SO, IMHO, a better mode of analysis would be gut feeling or intuition. Having lived all over this great land, I tend to agree with Doug. Southern states seem to have more black haters, but they also have more blacks. And the Industrial North has a LONG history of working-class anti-black racism, and proportionally fewer black voters to balance it out. It's an intuitive call, and it's not better than anyone else's call, but nonetheless, I wanted to point out how virtually useless statistics are in multi-variable situations, particularly when accurate sampling on the racism question is not even possible.

Either way, I liked (and agree with) your analysis, Doug, although I may have got there on a different train........!

The Clintons are losing and desperate.

If milking racism will help them "win", then they will milk racism.

BubbaJeff and Hildebeast will lose NO sleep whatsoever.

Racism exists. But don't blame it on Hillary. You say

it should not surprise anyone that Hillary Rodham Clinton would use racism

but is she really? Mind you, Hillary is the last person I want to see win this election. But that many Democrats have racist tendencies is not Hillary's fault. And I really can't say that she is pandering to racism. Sure, there are some comments she's made that some people will construe to be racist, but I doubt that's what's going on. It appears to me that her campaign is going all out to avoid any charges of racism.
—W—

Democrats are generally racist, if one looks at the history of politics in this country since the Civil War. A Democratic party claiming to be inclusive and fair is a relatively new phenomenon, probably no earlier than 1965.

Following the end of Reconstruction, the former Confederate states embraced the Democratic party with a vengeance and changed labels only when the party ideology began to be dominated by social liberals and political radicals in the late Vietnam era. Even in the north, the Democrat-voting bloc of organized labor was very racist. The industrial labor unions tended to be lily-white and regularly either denied or discourage non-white membership. The public service unions representing police and firemen were also conspicuous for their lack of melanin.

The so-called Reagan Democrats - dominated by disaffected southerners and northern labor - were voting in good part along racist lines, reacting to the "law and order" and "outside agitator" encodings used by Republicans or socially conservative Democrats. Notice how quickly that they returned to the Democrat fold when Bill Clinton, by the act of prominently humiliating Jesse Jackson and dissing rap artist Sista Souljah, showed them that he - like George Wallace - could "out nigger" George Bush.

The only people who are incapable of understanding the reality of that rank racism associated with Democratic party politics are fatuous Democrats who tend to believe their own party's propaganda.

Most sincerely,

T. J. Flapsaddle

TJF you always both impress and amaze me with your knowledge base covering a broad spectrum of knowledge, political or otherwise.

I enjoy reading your posts and always have the feeling I've been given something of value... : )

Your friend in thought.

Carl Nemo **==

p.s. I also sense you are not simply a "linkmaster" concerning your knowledge base... : |

duplicate deleted by poster

Flapsaddle, I happen to agree with you. I am not a frantic googler as you might assume. I read a lot of books and my first impression of what I read has pretty much found me correct. As far back as 1987 I discovered the hidden agenda of the GOP. My reading of many books at that time showed me exactly where America was headed in nation building. When I went online in the mid 90s I tried very hard to warn people of the undercurrent of this soon to be known as neoconservative movement. .

It was also a time when the religious right began their assault on Clinton. He was exposed as a skirt chasing roue. My years of reading showed me that far too many of our Presidents had been in the same adulterous positions. I learned at this time that many online forums had no background in basic political knowledge as they did not read!

Everything I write or comment on is my own interpretation of what I have read. You still continue to try and prove me wrong. That is your problem, not mine.

I never link to Wikipedia as it is nothing but someone elses opinion. I once felt that the internet would be a great place for the combining of information but it has become a fight to knock other's opinions off the site.

Basically I believe that we might agree on many subjects but you would never admit it.

Thank you Julius Caesar! We are heading into the same Roman Empire that Shakespeare wrote about.