Obama Presidency Discussion Thread

How would you vote in the 2008 US Presidential Election?

  • Obama-Biden (Democrat)

    Votes: 67 59.3%
  • McCain-Palin (Republican)

    Votes: 18 15.9%
  • Barr-Root (Libertarian)

    Votes: 14 12.4%
  • Nader-Gonzales (Independent-Ecology Party / Peace and Freedom Party)

    Votes: 5 4.4%
  • McKinney-Clemente (Green)

    Votes: 1 0.9%
  • Baldwin-Castle (Constitution)

    Votes: 7 6.2%
  • Gurney-? (Car & Driver)

    Votes: 1 0.9%
  • Other...

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    113
  • Poll closed .
Unfortunately, and it's exactly the same over here, a lot of folks think that a vote for a 3rd party is a wasted vote. Others are so ingrained to be either right wing or left wing that they'll vote that way no matter who is running, usually due to some kind of 'my family has always voted this way' mentality. It's probably the case that a 3rd party is highly unlikely to come to power, but in my eyes a strong swing in that direction isn't just a vote of no confidence to the party in power - it's also a message to the 'other side' that they'll not automatically get the disenfranchised votes either. It keeps both sides on their toes knowing that they might not necessarily get into power following a poor term by the other side.

It'd have to be some hell of a no confidence for the Lib Dems to get in power! I think Brown or Cameron would have to be caught making babies cry and turning it into honey, for that to happen. Interestingly, in my area, we don't have a Labour candidate, and in the local town, in one of the seats at the LE, the BNP candidate got more votes than the Labour candidate.

But you're so right, TC. There is a very strong party loyalty in this country.
 
I think you'll be surprised come the next general election how well the Lib Dems will do. People are sick of New Labour and Cameron's just a moron who'll say anything to oppose what Labour say. From what i've read of the recent Lib Dem party conference, they were received pretty well and actually had something worthwhile to say for a change. They won't be pre-booking Pickfords for a move to Number 10, but they will give candidates from both the other sides a fair kicking in some of the constituencies.
 
They certainly aren't as much of a dark horse as they were at the last election. I think we need to be careful how we view the government in relation to the current financial crisis.
 
All you have to do is look at the rhetoric to see that a large amount is about not letting the other guy win. More people can say they like Obama because he isn't Bush (or something similar, like change) than can tell you how many bills he has authored while in the Senate.

Right, but my point is that I'm not hearing the "Obama is the lesser of two equals" argument as often as I used to around here. He is winning a lot of people over on the economic issues here in Michigan, and with our state hurting for so long, people are looking to the opposite party for something different.
 
The Liberals are just practicing for the inevitable... a Palin/McCain administration. Nothin' to see, move along.
 
Panel finds Palin abused her power, thoughts? What does this mean for Palin and the McCain campaign?

In interest of keeping equal sides I'll include a few different versions of the same story so members can compare.

CNN.com
Panel: Palin abused power in trooper case
Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin abused her power as Alaska's governor and violated state ethics law by trying to get her ex-brother-in-law fired from the state police, a state investigator's report concluded Friday.

"Gov. Palin knowingly permitted a situation to continue where impermissible pressure was placed on several subordinates in order to advance a personal agenda," the report states.

Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan's refusal to fire State Trooper Mike Wooten from the state police force was "likely a contributing factor" to Monegan's July dismissal, but Palin had the authority as governor to fire him, the report by former Anchorage prosecutor Stephen Branchflower states.

However, it states that her efforts to get Wooten fired broke a state ethics law that bars public officials from pursuing personal interest through official action.

Monegan has said he was fired in July after refusing pressure to sack Wooten, who had gone through an acrimonious divorce and custody battle with Palin's sister.

Palin and her husband, Todd, have consistently denied wrongdoing, describing Wooten as a "rogue trooper" who had threatened their family -- allegations Branchflower discounted.

"I conclude that such claims of fear were not bona fide and were offered to provide cover for the Palins' real motivation: to get Trooper Wooten fired for personal family reasons," Branchflower wrote.

The Branchflower report states Todd Palin used his wife's office and its resources to press for Wooten's removal, and the governor "failed to act" to stop it. But because Todd Palin is not a state employee, the report makes no finding regarding his conduct.

The bipartisan Legislative Council, which commissioned the investigation after Monegan was fired, unanimously adopted the 263-page public report after a marathon executive session Friday.

About 1,000 more pages of documents compiled during the inquiry will remain confidential because they involve private personnel matters, according to the council's chairman, state Sen. Kim Elton.

"I believe that these findings may help people come to a conclusion on how they should vote" in the presidential election, Elton said.

McCain-Palin campaign spokeswoman Meg Stapleton said Palin would cooperate with the Personnel Board investigation. The Palins' lawyer has said an investigator named by that board wants to question them in late October.

Stapleton called the investigation "a partisan-led inquiry" run by supporters of Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama, but hailed its finding that Monegan's firing broke no law.

"Gov. Palin was cleared of the allegation of an improper firing, which is what this investigation was approved to look into," she said.

Stapleton went on to say that the Legislature exceeded its mandate in finding an ethics violation. "Lacking evidence to support the original Monegan allegation, the Legislative Council seriously overreached, making a tortured argument to find fault without basis in law or fact."

Rep. John Coghill, a Republican who criticized the handling of the investigation, said it was "well-done professionally."

He said Palin "bumped right against the edges" of the state's ethics laws but that he would give "the benefit of the doubt to the governor, though, at this point."

Palin originally agreed to cooperate with the Legislative Council inquiry, and disclosed in August that her advisers had contacted Department of Public Safety officials nearly two dozen times regarding her ex-brother-in-law.

But once she became Sen. John McCain's running mate, her advisers began painting the investigation as a weapon of Democratic partisans.

Ahead of Friday's hearing, Palin supporters wearing clown costumes and carrying balloons denounced the probe as a "kangaroo court" and a "three-ring circus" led by supporters of Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama.
advertisement

The state senator managing the probe, Sen. Hollis French, fueled those complaints with a September 2 interview in which he warned the inquiry could yield an "October Surprise" for the GOP. But Palin's lawyers already had begun pushing for the state Personnel Board to launch its own investigation, calling it the proper legal venue for the matter.

"The report speaks for itself," French told CNN Friday night.

Source: http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/10/palin.investigation/index.html

Fox News
Panel: Palin Abused Her Power in Firing of Commissioner
Sarah Palin "abused her power" as governor in the disciplinary case against a state trooper, according to a legislative panel's report released Friday, though it also found that her firing of a state commissioner was "proper and lawful."

The ethics inquiry, which Palin's supporters have called politically motivated, found that a family grudge was a factor in Palin's dismissal of Public Safety Commissioner Walter Monegan -- but not the sole factor. The report says Palin failed to keep her husband from meddling in the discipline of the state trooper, her brother-in-law, following a contentious divorce.

The panel of state lawmakers released its report Friday after spending more than six hours in a closed-door session reviewing the findings. At the heart of the investigation was the question of whether Palin, the Republican vice presidential nominee, had pressured Monegan to fire Trooper Mike Wooten.

Palin has said Monegan was fired as part of a legitimate budget dispute.

Investigator Stephen Branchflower, who drafted the bipartisan panel's report, found Palin in violation of a state ethics law that prohibits public officials from using their office for personal gain.

"Today's report showed that the governor acted within her proper and lawful authority in the reassignment of Walt Monegan," Meg Stapleton, a spokeswoman for the McCain-Palin campaign, said in a written statement.

Stapleton added that the panel's report shows that the inquiry was partisan and that Palin and her husband, Todd Palin, were "completely justified in their concern regarding Trooper Wooten, given his violent and rogue behavior."

Monegan, meanwhile, said he felt "vindicated."

"It sounds like they've validated my belief and opinions," he said. "And that tells me I'm not totally out in left field."

The nearly 300-page report does not recommend sanctions or a criminal investigation.

The investigation revealed that Todd Palin has extraordinary access to the governor's office and her closest advisers. He used that access to try to get trooper Wooten fired, the report found.

Branchflower said Sarah Palin violated a statute of the Alaska Executive Branch Ethics Act.

Palin and John McCain's supporters had hoped the inquiry's finding would be delayed until after the presidential election, in which they face an uphill battle against Barack Obama and Joe Biden. But the panel of lawmakers voted to release the report, although not without dissension.

"I think there are some problems in this report," said Republican state Sen. Gary Stevens, a member of the panel. "I would encourage people to be very cautious, to look at this with a jaundiced eye."

Source: http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/10/10/panel-palin-abused-power-firing-commissioner/

BBC
Palin abused power, probe finds
Alaska Governor Sarah Palin is guilty of abuse of power, according to a probe by the state legislature.

The Republican vice-presidential candidate was accused of sacking a senior state official, Walter Monegan, in connection with a family feud.

But the McCain-Palin campaign team said that the report showed Mrs Palin acted within "proper and lawful authority".

The report could have a significant effect on Republican hopes of winning next month's US presidential election.

Mrs Palin has always denied any wrongdoing, and her supporters say the charges are motivated by her political opponents.

She stood accused of dismissing Mr Monegan for refusing to sack a state trooper who was in a bitter custody battle with her sister.

The report concluded a family grudge was not the sole reason for the dismissal, but was a likely contributing factor.

However, the report said that Mrs Palin had not exceeded her powers when she sacked Mr Monegan.

Speaking after a bipartisan investigating panel reached its decision on what has become known as Troopergate, Mr Monegan said he felt "vindicated".

"It sounds like they've validated my belief and opinions," he said. "And that tells me I'm not totally out in left field."

Ethical violation

The panel found Mrs Palin in violation of a state ethics law prohibiting public officials from using their office for personal gain.

"I find that Governor Sarah Palin abused her power by violating Alaska Statute 39.52.110 (a) of the Alaska Executive Branch Ethics Act," investigator Steve Branchflower concluded in the panel's 263-page report.

But Mrs Palin's lawyer said that the report had not been conclusive.

"In order to violate the ethics law, there has to be some personal gain," said Thomas Van Flein.

"Mr Branchflower has failed to identify any financial gain."

And Alaskan state Senator Gary Stevens, a Republican, said there were "some problems" with the finding.

"I would encourage people to be very cautious, to look at this with a jaundiced eye," said Senator Stevens, after the report's release was announced.

Several Republican politicians had earlier attempted to have the investigation stopped on the grounds that it was politically motivated.

The investigation into the affair began before Mr McCain selected Mrs Palin as his running mate in August.

The US presidential race has now become so polarised both Republicans and Democrats will likely see the report's findings as vindication for their own trenchant views about Mrs Palin, says the BBC's Richard Lister in Washington.

Alaska's governor will either be seen as the victim of a Democratic party hatchet job, or a hypocrite.

Most voters, for now at least, seem more concerned about who will extract them from the current economic crisis, than any questions about political infighting in far-off Alaska, our correspondent adds.

Violent trooper?

Mrs Palin maintains she fired Mr Monegan in July over a budgetary dispute.

But Mr Monegan said he was dismissed for resisting pressure from Mrs Palin and her husband, Todd, to fire State Trooper Mike Wooten, Mrs Palin's former brother-in-law.

Mr Monegan said he simply wanted the truth to be made known.

"The governor did want me to fire [Mr Wooten], and I chose to not," he told the Associated Press news agency.

"He didn't do anything under my watch to result in termination."

Todd Palin has admitted he did publicise what he called the "injustice of a violent trooper keeping his badge".

But he said his wife, who did not give evidence to the enquiry, then told him to drop the matter.

The McCain campaign on Thursday issued its own report, written by its staff, stating that the Alaska governor was not guilty of any wrongdoing.

"The following document will prove Walt Monegan's dismissal was a result of his insubordination and budgetary clashes with Governor Palin and her administrators," campaign officials wrote. "Trooper Wooten is a separate issue."

The 21-page report suggests that the allegations against Mrs Palin stem from a conspiracy planned by a former campaign opponent of hers, Andrew Halcro, and Mr Wooten.

"It is tragic that a false story hatched by a blogger over drinks with Trooper Wooten led the legislature to allocate over $100,000 of public money to be spent in what has become a politically-driven investigation," it concludes.

The McCain campaign says the inquiry has been muddied by innuendo, rumour and partisan politics.

Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7662820.stm
 
Panel finds Palin abused her power, thoughts? What does this mean for Palin and the McCain campaign?

It will be interesting to see how the pundits and thereby the candidates play with this. I cannot see it working out well for the McCain campaign whatsoever, as they're already calling this bi-partisan panel (three Republicans, two Democrats) that it is "partisan panel ran by Obama-supporters." Defense mode has been activated, and with the legislature clearly pointing fingers in saying that the Alaskan people cannot trust Governor Palin based on Alaskan law that states:

Alaska Statute 39.52.110(a) of the Alaska Executive Branch Ethics Act
...each public officer holds office as a public trust, and any effort to benefit a personal or financial interest through official action is a violation of that trust...

It'll be an interesting week in more ways than one.

====

Personally speaking, this is pretty much the frosting on the cake against the choice of Governor Palin outright. There was a point in time in which I very easily could have went for McCain if he would have matched his moderate stance on the issues with another moderate choice for VP, essentially giving the "base" GOP voters (of which I believe of are a separate party) the finger. The choice of Palin has been a disaster for the McCain campaign on so many levels that it really only was a matter of time before this came along.

What I find most-interesting is that this was something that was known about before the choice of Governor Palin, and to that end, we have to wonder how different the campaign could have looked if he had chosen someone like Tom Ridge or Norm Coleman, or whoever. Sure, the economy has been a blessing for the Obama campaign, but the choice of a moderate or otherwise "realistic" conservative VP would have likely worked much, much better.

===

Add to that having Obama buy half-hour timeslots on NBC and CBS in prime time, yeah, things aren't looking great for McCain.
 
i think that the eskimos should kick all the white people out of alaska and declare alaska an independant country...

I think that would give me no end in pleasure to watch that happen.
 
Personally speaking, this is pretty much the frosting on the cake against the choice of Governor Palin outright.

"Someone get Jeb Bush on the phone, now please..." :ill:

Considering that some noted Conservative pundits were already saying that McCain has had his chips before this judgment, I can't see how this is possibly going to help turn things around for the McCain campaign. Palin, arguably, was chosen to bring straying Republicans back on board - making up for McCain's perceived shortcomings in the eyes of the massively influential evangelical vote.

Ironically, it is the very conservatives that Palin is meant to be bringing back on side that could be the most critical of these revelations. Palin's ace cards - her down to Earth appeal, her family values, her personal and professional integrity, and especially her claim to be apart from power-brokers and "elites" - are all now seriously compromised.
 
Panel finds Palin abused her power, thoughts? What does this mean for Palin and the McCain campaign?


Palin is just, awful. And i can agree that political attacks are part of the process, but i still hate them. And McCain/Palin are certainly being more smug about the whole thing. How long are they going to draw out how Obama was on a panel with someone who was a domestic terrorist 40 years ago? They try to pass it off as if they play bridge together every Saturday.

Isn't it at all possible that some of McCain's wartime buddies were America conspiracy theorists or something of the sort? People were pissed in Vietnam, very pissed. Or maybe he didn't have any friends because he crashed all those jets.
 
Palin is just, awful. And i can agree that political attacks are part of the process, but i still hate them. And McCain/Palin are certainly being more smug about the whole thing. How long are they going to draw out how Obama was on a panel with someone who was a domestic terrorist 40 years ago? They try to pass it off as if they play bridge together every Saturday.

Isn't it at all possible that some of McCain's wartime buddies were America conspiracy theorists or something of the sort? People were pissed in Vietnam, very pissed. Or maybe he didn't have any friends because he crashed all those jets.

Well at the time Obama was friends with the "domestic terrorist", the "terrorist" was helping communities, schools, people without much money etc... Thats true terrorism, caring about your country!
 
Palin, arguably, was chosen to bring straying Republicans back on board - making up for McCain's perceived shortcomings in the eyes of the massively influential evangelical vote.

It all depends on what you're looking for when you say "Republican" these days. The problem with McCain is that he has too many factions of Republicans to please. He clearly alienated the State Fair Republicans just by being nominated, and that was what Palin is to offset. Then he alienated Georgetown Republicans by going B-S crazy with his economic plans. Then you get the Libertarians who are mad as hell, more liberal Republicans who generally like McCain but have been put off by his tactics, etc...

This will likely go down in history as one of the races that will be a benchmark to see how things work in the science of politics. Granted, there have been a lot of outside factors to affect this race (namely the economy), but nevertheless, it has been an interesting one. With three weeks left, you know it can only get better!
 
YSSMAN
you know it can only get better!
You truly are an optimist! I reckon things could get very ugly indeed... but atleast John McCain has actually spoken out against the vitriol of his own supporters (watch the video on this article: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/us_elections_2008/7665780.stm) - and it's about time. I think McCain ought to have nipped this in the bud sooner, failing to respond to some vicious comments from his own audience, but atleast it's a start...

It's a measure of the disarray the McCain/Palin campaign has fallen into, when McCain is having to challenge his own supporters, whipped into an indignant frenzy by his own running mate - the sad truth is, however, that Palin has been instrumental in stirring up nothing short of pure hatred toward Obama - inciting cries of "kill him", "terrorist", "Arab", "Muslim" and of course, they don't even need to say the obvious...

The only saving grace is that Palin is basically preaching to the converted, and is likely only to alienate the middle ground by trying the same old right-wing tricks - playing upon people's prejudices and insecurities - rather than saying anything of any actual substance. But she's playing with fire, and without even having fully played the race card yet, she's still got plenty of fuel...
 
I believe that's a reference to Obama's comment about not looking like the other president's on 'those dollar bills' (and the McCain campaign ads which also made the same point...)

 
What do you mean?

My point was that the only people who are referencing race or other bigotry into this election are Obama and his followers. Any challenge by Republicans will and has been deemed racist. You cannot call him articulate, you cannot compare him to movie stars, you can't even say his full name without being called a racist.

The Mainstream Media is pissing themselves senseless over one stupid woman who called Obama an "arab" at a McCain rally (McCain rightly took the mic away). Well, I got 40 years of Liberal bigotry to show you, I'm glad they finally noticed.
 
Historical Context Alert:

The racists and other "social conservatives" that had defined the Southern Democrats changed parties around the time of Vietnam, and shortly thereafter.

Guess which one they went to?

No single party is perfect, and although the GOP may make a claim that they are the party that "freed the slaves," we've also got to remember that Lincoln singed off on martial law, killed hundreds of thousands of his own people, and essentially oversaw the greatest aggrandizement of federal power not seen again until the times of WWII and the Cold War.

===

Just as a thought on the lady who referred to Obama as "an Arab" (like its automatically bad to be one, ie racist), the McCain campaign is being spoon-fed the crap that they stirred up months ago. From the people shouting "terrorist," "off with his head," "treason," etc to clear cases of outright lying to the public over the background of Senator Obama, this is the "S-storm" that they (the McCain campaign) have to deal with.

Notice today that at a campaign speech in Ohio that when Obama was discussing Senator McCain at the podium, the crowed began to boo/sneer, and he stopped it immediately. He didn't pull a Sarah Palin or Cindy McCain, letting the feelings of hatred and disgust fester through the room. He stopped it immediately out of respect for his opponent.

Yes, I'm thankful that McCain took the microphone away from that woman, and yes, I think it is very honorable that he has been defending the honor of the Senator from Illinois at his various appearances... But when you're purposely walking a very thin red line that he had lowed not to cross fewer than six months earlier, this once again has to bring into question the ability of McCain ever to give us his famous "straight-talk" ever again.

With three weeks left, Obama is polling on a national level at 10%+ over John McCain. On a state-by-state level, he is winning in far more of the toss-ups than most thought he would be, and beyond that he is doing well in states where he technically shouldn't (North Carolina, Florida, Virginia). McCain has one more night to prove himself against this formidable opponent, and without a good showing on Wednesday, it seems fairly safe to say that between the hammering that he is getting from both the conservative and mainstream press, not to mention the terrible slide with the economy, the McCain campaign will be in rough water come November 4th.
 
:odd: I have Dish Network and I just noticed there is an "Obama" channel... WTF?

I thought there was a limit on face time or something.
 
No, not really. What it comes down to is how much money each side has, and by comparison, Obama is swimming in cash compared to McCain. To that end, he had enough cash to buy a half-hour of airtime during prime-time on CBS and NBC October 29th. Even then, its not just Obama that has money. The Democrats are spending ooodles of cash in Senate and House races as well, and with them looking like having a fair shot at taking a good number of those races... A Democrat-controlled House, Senate and White House? Its a strong possibility at this point.

...And Just Because I Love Seeing My Fellow Republicans Squirm...



One More Kick to the Stomach?

William F. Buckley's son, Christopher Buckley, will be voting for Obama. Go figure.

Keep in mind that Op-Ed has caused Chris' resignation from The National Review, founded by his father, earlier this week. He, like many Republicans, are using their heads and getting out while they still can. This is possibly the best part of his argument:

Chris Buckley
He is also a lefty. I am not. I am a small-government conservative who clings tenaciously and old-fashionedly to the idea that one ought to have balanced budgets. On abortion, gay marriage, et al, I’m libertarian. I believe with my sage and epigrammatic friend P.J. O’Rourke that a government big enough to give you everything you want is also big enough to take it all away.
But having a first-class temperament and a first-class intellect, President Obama will (I pray, secularly) surely understand that traditional left-politics aren’t going to get us out of this pit we’ve dug for ourselves. If he raises taxes and throws up tariff walls and opens the coffers of the DNC to bribe-money from the special interest groups against whom he has (somewhat disingenuously) railed during the campaign trail, then he will almost certainly reap a whirlwind that will make Katrina look like a balmy summer zephyr.
Obama has in him—I think, despite his sometimes airy-fairy “We are the people we have been waiting for” silly rhetoric—the potential to be a good, perhaps even great leader. He is, it seems clear enough, what the historical moment seems to be calling for.
So, I wish him all the best. We are all in this together. Necessity is the mother of bipartisanship. And so, for the first time in my life, I’ll be pulling the Democratic lever in November. As the saying goes, God save the United States of America.
 
Joe the Plumber!



James the House N*gger!

ESSENCE.COM: I can imagine. You’ve generated a lot of buzz. What attention have you been getting since the rally?

HARRIS: I’ve heard from Americans of African descent, scattered across the fruited plain, to the tune of about 1,000 or more. I’d say 99 percent of it has been straight up hate on a level that I find a bit overwhelming. They’re coming through my blog, Facebook, e-mail and my business site.

ESSENCE.COM: What are people saying?
HARRIS: Let me just pull some up now. [Reading] “Hey man, are you the plant that sucked up to McCain? What were you thinking? You should be ashamed of yourself.” “Are you that self-loathing bastard?” This is just at random. “You are lost, sad and worthy of pity. I will not hate you; I will call you by your rightful name: House ******.” And that was mild! [Laughs.]

http://www.essence.com/news_entertainment/news/articles/mccainsupporterclearsair

 
Last edited:
Well, I've only seen about five minutes of the second debate around the economical crisis you guys are facing. Isn't the third debate this evening? I'm going to try to follow both over the next days. I don't really have a vote for either of the candidates (incase I would live in America that is), I'm a rather skeptical guy so I need to follow both of 'em more to make up my mind. My whole class supports Obama, and calls McCain an insane guy. I haven't heard much backup of their support on Obama, nor anything to backup their McCain claims, so I'm holding myself neutral, avoiding any discussion about both candidates. I am curious though as to how both candidates will change the future of America. Bush wasn't the one that led to more terrorism in my opinion, since terrorism against America started long before 2001. An afro-american as a President would maybe give a change of views upon America, but I'm not sure about that. People here seem to prefer Obama over McCain purely because he's a Democrat, and an Afro-American, rather than realizing the man they'll be voting for is the man that has to lead the most powerful nation in the world, he has to take of his citizens, families, jobs, the economy and whatnot. I am anyways staying careful in my statements, I'll be the neutral guy :)
 
Last edited:
Well, I've only seen about five minutes of the second debate around the economical crisis you guys are facing. Isn't the third debate this evening?

Yes, its today, the 15th.

My whole class supports Obama, and calls McCain an insane guy. I haven't heard much backup of their support on Obama, nor anything to backup their McCain claims, so I'm holding myself neutral, avoiding any discussion about both candidates.

Do they give a reason why they would call McCain "insane"? What is their motivation to do so?

People here seem to prefer Obama over McCain purely because he's a Democrat, and an Afro-American, rather than realizing the man they'll be voting for is the man that has to lead the most powerful nation in the world, he has to take of his citizens, families, jobs, the economy and whatnot.

I have a video of some famous dude to show your friends:



"I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character."

Don't vote for a person because he is black or he is white. Vote for the person who represents your values. It is an incredible state of hypocrisy that a group of people in America would subscribe in the same bigotry and racism that chained them down only 50 years ago.
 
Last edited:
Back