Yes, I believe in affirmative action, and yes it is time for a President of color.

[calteacherguy]

And no...I'm not just supporting Obama "because he is black."

I believe Obama is the best choice, regardless of race, for reasons I posted in a previous thead. All of these reasons are well-known and have been already articulated by many. But we should not deny the added bonus Obama brings, and we should act affirmatively.

It is time, long past time. When I say Obama is the only candidate (in the current field) with the potential to transform American politics and begin to "heal this nation's soul," that's what I am talking about. And yes, it's because he's a man of color and because of his character and ideals. We cannot deny that reality.

It is time, long past time. We can turn a page on American history, and our image in the world. Not even Hillary can achieve that kind of historical moment, and it is not trivial. I assure, the ramification for American people and young people who witness the first person of color become President of the U.S. will not be trivial. It will have far-reaching effects on the aspirations world-view of young people all across America.

It will not be trivial, it will be transforming.

[JackDragna]

1. I'd settle for a president..

..who didn't think a thesaurus is a dinosaur.

[calteacherguy]

4. Hear, hear! But why just "settle?" nt

[Jillian]

15. To quote my teenage daughter "That was random"

did someone say that?

I hope not. I still use a thesaurus. (except now I do it online:) )

[babylonsister]

2. I so think you 're a plant; prove me wrong. Bye,. nt

[calteacherguy]

3. What kind of plant? Redwood tree?

I'm a tall guy, could I be a redwood tree, perhaps?

[bling bling]

8. Brilliant retort. Are you a master in the art of political debate or something? No fair!! n/t

[babylonsister]

11. No, but I recognize people who are disingenuous. nt

[calteacherguy]

19. Please explain, how do you perceive me being disingenuous? nt

[saltpoint]

5. Your second full paragraph is a mess.

You write:

_ _ _
When I say Obama is the only candidate (in the current field) with the ability to transform American politics and begin to "heal this nation's soul," that's what I am talking about. And yes, it's because he's a man of color and because of his character and ideals. We cannot deny that reality.
_ _ _

Your claim is that Obama is the exclusive transformer in the Democratic nomination race. That's bullshit. He's A transformer, or potentially so, as the others are.

His ethnicity should not be a factor in how "transformative" he is. There are "transformative" people of all stripes and backgrounds. It's stingy and ridiculous to suggest otherwise.

You cite Obama's "color," and "character and ideals" as a "reality" that will gird and bolster this transformation in American politics. I love the man but don't feel his character and ideals are any better or any worse than his Democratic opponents for the party's nomination. You obviously do but offer no distinctions among the candidates.

[calteacherguy]

6. Disagree.

I think you are denying a part of reality, political and otherwise.

[saltpoint]

7. It's your thread. You haven't defined that reality.

Others can offer comments once you do.

But you haven't yet.

Obama's reality is no different than Dodd's, or else it is; in either case, you leave no chance for any distinctions or definitions.

[calteacherguy]

9. I defined it in the OP. I don't think you're reading carefully enough.

I'm not talking about "Obama's reality."

I'm talking about the reality of what he brings to the race. "Obama is the only candidate with the potential to transform American politics."

When I first heard that said on the PBS new hour by Mark Shields and his sidekick (who's name escapes me) months ago it rang true, and it rings even truer now. You are of couse, entitled to your own opinion. I can offer you no more defense of mine except what I have already posted. If that isn't enough to convince you of what I do believe is the political reality, than we simply agree to disagree.

[saltpoint]

10. It bears repeating since you can't seem to follow your own topic:

Obama is not the exclusive bearer of potential transformational change in American politics.

Give that one more shot.

[calteacherguy]

12. It's all in the OP, but I will rephrase it for you.

1. Americans are sick of politicians, and Obama is not perceived as a professional politician. I know you will disagree with this, but that is the perception people have, even if you want to argue it's not a deserved perception (I feel it is deserved).

2. His campaign is about bringing as all together, as Americans for the common good

3. Obama is Black.

Those are the reasons, and if you still disagree with Mark Shields and (who is his sidekick, anyway?) then we just agree to disagree. Frankly, however, I don't think any serious student of American history would disagree.

[Jillian]

13. Obama is a GREAT politician

That's why his donations are pouring in.

He has mastered the game of politics.

[calteacherguy]

14. In a sense, yes. In another sense, no. nt

[saltpoint]

16. Again, your post is a mess. Has someone claimed that Barack Obama

is not black? What are you talking about?

Obama is most certainly a professional politican; and a good one. One voter's perception that he is is no better or worse than another voter's perception that he is not. Your claim on point two is inaccurate.

In your OP, which is also a mess, you claim your endorsement of Obama's transformative powers is not because he's black. But wait -- by the end of the post it IS because he's a person of color. So which is it? He's transformative BECAUSE of his ethnicity or race, or he isn't, or, is he transformative DESPITE his ethnicity or race? What point is being made?

In any event Obama is not the first Afro-American to seek the top office. Why would prior Afro-American candidates NOT be transformative? It seems to me they most certainly would have been.

But not uniquely so, and not definitely so. We never are sure of a president's greatness in any respect until he (or she) is elected and has begun to serve. Sometimes not even then.

You're a teacher. You should know that.

[calteacherguy]

17. Of course we cannot sure. Please read more carefully.

"potential"

[saltpoint]

18. Potential inhabits all presidents, dude.

You need to come clean.

[calteacherguy]

20. I agree: "potential inhabits all Presidents"

But not just Presidents, every person on Earth. Every child in America, black or white. A president of color would be an inspiration to all young people in America. It would change the way many perceive their place in society, and that is not trivial.

Oh, I said I wan't going to post anymore...we agree to disagree, right?

[saltpoint]

21. You seem unwilling or unable to grasp the contradiction in your own

post.

Barack Obama is a professional politican -- a very, very smart one -- whose ethnicity and import-upon-election are not in question on these boards.

You are claiming that he is singularly transformative among Democratic candidates.

That is incorrect.

[calteacherguy]

22. We agree to disagee.

:hi:

[saltpoint]

23. I'm tired of talking to a block of concrete. So long to you and

hello to the Ignore button.

Adios.

[calteacherguy]

24. delete. nt

[tkmorris]

25. I hear what you're saying

Obama is certainly an inspirational speaker, and he does appear to have the potential to reach at least Independents, if not the hard-core Repub base. Furthermore, I would agree that it is past due time to consider a person "of color" as you put it, for president, though unlike you I give him no bonus points simply because he is. However, I have a problem supporting him.

The Obama "package" seems to contain far too much style and sparkle, but very little hard policy. I don't care how inspiring the president is, I don't care if he can bring down the house with thunderous applause. I want to know what he intends to DO. This country is pretty well broken right now and we need real changes to fix it, not a motivational speaker. If you coupled the polish of Obama with the policy ideas of an Edwards, or better a Kucinich, and I'd be right there with you. Until he sets himself apart from the field with some real ideas about how to fix this mess I cannot support him.

[calteacherguy]

26. Last time I checked none of the candidates' ideas had been copyrighted.

The next President will have plenty of ideas from which to evaluate, choose, and propose to the Congress. Let's hope some of them pass the Congress.

The ideals of Obama and Edwards, in my view, our quite similar. I'm not overly concerned with the number of policy papers produced daily at this time.

I'd rather have a candidare who listens and learns than one who puts out the most policy papers the quickest a year and a half from when they will take office.

[tkmorris]

27. Umm, I did try to stay civil

Did I fail in some way?

The point is that at this point I have no idea what Obama plans to actually DO as president. No amount of charisma can overcome that. He's going to have to give me some meat to chew on and when he does I will listen with an open mind. Until he does however, to me he's just another guy with ambition.

[calteacherguy]

28. Fair enough. I don't see it that way, but fair enough.

It is important to remember that only Congress can really DO in the sense of passing legislation.

Kudos to you for paying such close attentiion to the race, most Americans aren't at this point.

But they will start to after Labor Day...keep listening.

[sampsonblk]

29. He's not even competitive at this point

Let's be honest. He's pulling in a lot of money. But he isn't even in this race yet.

[calteacherguy]

30. O.K., he's not in the race yet. You certainly have an interesting criteria. nt

[sampsonblk]

32. He's behind nationally and in virtually every state-nt

[calteacherguy]

36. Well, then by your criteria no one is in the race, and there is no race. nt

[sampsonblk]

37. Very good!

Its Hillary's race. She hasn't even put forth much effort yet.

[Alexander]

31. You are contradicting yourself.

On one hand, you say you're not supporting Obama just because he's black, and on the other hand, you're saying you are supporting Obama just because he's black.

Which is it? :shrug:

[Tellurian]

33. Will Obama be hiring more Republicans to work on his campaign?

Just wondering, since a bevy of operatives will be available soon from McCain's campaign. Anyone ever heard of a Democratic presidential candidate hiring Republican operatives and consultants to win a democratic nomination? Ive never heard of it.

[DangerDave921]

34. Color

I do not judge people by the color of their skin. So I don't care what color the next president is, as long as he/she is ready to enact sane policies that will help America reclaim its once great stature in the world and deliver the promise of freedom to EVERYONE.

I really believe what MLK said about content of character. So to me, Obama has to be judged on his policies, not on his color. Think of how you would react if some RW'er said how excited he was to have a WHITE president and how that would be good for the country.

[baldguy]

35. In 1960, John Kennedy's Catholicism was a major campaign issue.

In 2004 John Kerry's Catholicism received barely a mention.