1. It doesn't explain why he stayed in the church.

Huh? Go to http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/hisownwords/ and search for "Why associate myself with Reverend Wright in the first place, they may ask? Why not join another church?" You may not like his answer, but he sure addressed this question head-on.

2a. You almost got this, but again, go back to the speech. The line Obama used was It's that he spoke as if our society was static. Note the "he spoke as if" part. Rhetoric. So you and Obama agree!

2b. You ramble a bit here, but I think you missed the point with it just falls into ridiculous post-racial naivete. No. I don't know how this speech could be considered post-racial; it addressed racial issues head-on in a way that just isn't done very often. If wanting to move past the "racial stalemate" and then starting to frame up some rhetoric about what that might look like (complete with almost-too-poignant story) is naive, then yes, I suppose he's naive.

I read and listened to this speech again tonight; I continue to think it's a great speech.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QOdlnzkeoyQ

Controversial? Sure.

A racist, anti-American hater? Not so much.

Mohammed's not the only one getting caricatured these days.

Gallup: http://www.gallup.com/poll/election2008.aspx

RCP: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/polls/

That's called spin, my friend.

Spin this one: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/democratic_presidential_nomination-191.html#charts

Hillary peaked last fall and has oscillated around 45% ever since. Not bad, but not quite good enough.

Also, these national polls are largely meaningless, in terms of picking a nominee. They are also largely meaningless in terms of predicting the winner next November. Two months ago, Obama was polling at 25% in the Dem race. Last September, McCain and Huckabee, the last men standing for the GOP, polled at 15% between the two (McCain under 11, Huck at 4.5). Things change.

I don't have a big problem with Hillary hanging in there for awhile longer. There's some benefit with keeping the hate machine tied up with two targets. But it would be good to get things tied up ahead of the convention.

But if your post brings more people to xkcd, so much the better.

My favorite is 386: http://xkcd.com/386/

There's plenty of things not to like about this, but that's why it's called a "compromise."

Let's do something similar for FL and move on; the Democrats need to at least get down to 1 train wreck.

Obama is a mystery wrapped inside an enigma. Who is he really? A secret agent of the Taliban? Mugabe's heir apparent?

Or maybe just a really smart, really ambitious politician?

I found my most apt summary here (http://blog.pmarca.com/2008/03/an-hour-and-a-h.html):

First, this is a normal guy.

Second, this is a smart guy.

Third, this is not a radical.

Fourth, this is the first credible post-Baby Boomer presidential candidate.

I support Obama because I think he has the personal qualities and intellect that are best suited toward leading our nation at this juncture where our economy is in the tank and our foreign policy is a mess. The rest is details.

I think it's going to be Cole Hamels and Brett Myers and something that indicates how bad the rest of the rotation is and rhymes with Myers.

Spahn and Sain and pray for rain.

Hamels and Myers, and then retire?

Myers and Hamels, then a bunch of camels?

Brett and Cole, and then they fold?

Cole and Brett, then we fret?

I'm keeping my day job.

I remember a visiting speaker ripping into us 2nd graders for knowing the names of all sorts of sharks, but not knowing how many scutes there were on a turtle's carapace. The criticism being that our book learnin' was inferior to going out and messing about in ponds and creeks.

So I've heard this before. It was true then and it's true now, but being cranky about it doesn't help the message get heard (my reaction in 2nd grade? Who is this guy, anyway?).

E.O. Wilson's a giant; like Rev. Wright, the soundbite does not mark the man.

Can all of us who do not live in PA/IN/OR/etc or are unable to engage in said primaries take a break for the next couple weeks?

I can only have the Hillary-is-a-liar/Obama-is-an-unelectable-fake debate so many times.

And W.E.S., if you really interpret polls as a solid predictor of results 7 months from now (as opposed to a useful indicator of current conditions), you are insane. Check Obama and McCain polling from 7 months ago and see how they were doing. Here's a link from September 2007 that shows McCain polling at 10%, and Obama at 15%: http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x1322.xml?ReleaseID=1102

Yeah, that was a useful predictor.

Things change.

1. "Winner takes all" is a terrible system. Please consider supporting the National Popular Vote: http://www.nationalpopularvote.com/

2. I know it's the current fashion to hate caucuses, but it's kind of funny: Our New England Town Meetings (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Town_meeting), which are heralded as wonderful and historic democratic institutions, are a lot like caucuses.