@sajwan - The use of a "present" vote is common in the Illinois legislature. See this description. And, in case you think Abner Mikva is just another Obama apologist, he gave up a position as a federal judge to serve as White House counsel to Bill Clinton.

Now on to racism. Obama is no neophyte. He is a year older than Bill Clinton was when Clinton ran for the presidency.

Who is to say Obama would not have risen more quickly had he been white? Is it possible, as a Harvard Law Review president, that he would have been recruited for office? Would he have had become an attorney general, and then governor, like another elite trained politician making news? How many black governors have been elected in US history? (3) How many black US senators? (again, 3). So where, exactly, is the big advantage in his race?

Here is the link that didn't appear in code re above -

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/16/opinion/16mikva.html?ref=opinion

Linking articles contemporaneous to the event is not "swiftboating". I know you didn't read the links, because the first link does not lead to an article, though it can be found in HTML through a google search.

Care to link an independent account which supports the Swiftboater's claims against Kerry? Unlike the links provided, there is no contemporaneous military account which buttressed the Swiftboaters.

As for your comment on Obama's spiritual advisor, show me a person who believes in every comment a spiritual advisor makes. I certainly don't support my Church's views on homosexuality, but I haven't stopped attending Church. There are millions of Christians who believe in gay rights, abortion rights, and stem cell research who still attend church regularly.

Personally, I didn't think most of the comments that are the cause of the furore were outrageous. There are many progressives, and even libertarians, who have made such statements. The only ones I reject, that I have read of, are his statements on government ties to AIDS and drugs

Yes, Florida did not adhere to the rules. But disenfranchising millions of voters will hurt the Democratic nominee in the next election. The DNC must bite the bullet and fund another contest.

Now snake, how could I possibly show you a link for an independent confirmation of a lost and long gone incident in the rivers of South east Asia in the early 60s? I don't even care, that is why I wrote that the professional smearing group also known as Swiftboat Veterans for the Truth swore by the veracity of their account as these independent "verifiers" do.

You missed the point. Most media outlets investigated the Swiftboater claims, and concluded there was little evidence to verify their claims.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/20/politics/campaign/20swift.html?ex=1250913600&en=9b6f27de16c97265&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland

http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/washingtonpost/access/681534261.html?dids=681534261:681534261&FMT=ABS&FMTS=ABS:FT&date=Aug+22%2C+2004&author=Michael+Dobbs&pub=The+Washington+Post&edition=&startpage=A.01&desc=Swift+Boat+Accounts+Incomplete

One of Kerry's crew mates, who was there, discounted the Swiftboater's assertions -

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/specials/chi-0408220342aug22,1,3455991.story?coll=chi-newsspecials-hed&ctrack=1&cset=true

So here, we have an independent verification of the visit, another letter writer who claims to have been there, and yet, you still won't acknowledge that Senator Clinton's memory is, at best, faulty.

As for Jeremiah, well Obama has been going to that church for 20 years, all his children have been baptized by the good ol' Jeremiah, Obama's last book is titled as one of Jeremiah most infamous speeches, Jeremiah was in one of Obama's committee until yesterday . . . but, oh not to worry, their relationship is purely spiritual. Well, I do not want the country in the hands of a man with such rotten spirit, God damn America would become a sad reality.

Unless you are very young, I would defy you to find that everyone whose company you keep is, absolutely pure. Are you???

As a Christian, I don't judge Rev. Wright's spirit, or that of Obama. And, as I stated previously, I don't find most of what Rev. Wright stated particularly egregious.

Rezko, Wright . . . you will be known for the company you keep.

Hsu, Nemazee, Peter Paul, Martinez, and let's not go to Burkle, Gupta, and Giustra, and how much of their "donations" may help Senator Clinton's campaign.

It is a two way street.

This has to do with Hillary's character, not her sex.

Have we not heard the same thing many, many times about Dubya? How people can't stand to look at "the Chimp"? How he is smug and condascending? How he mangles basic English? How they even "turn off the tv" when he is speaking?

I really see no difference.

People are not as stupid as politicians seem to believe. They sense insincerity and smugness. These are Hillary's problems, not her lack of a penis.

I think you have missed the boat, Joan.

The primary is about securing a nomination. It is about why you are the best candidate for the party. The candidates should be playing to the base, not the general electorate.

Hillary is a very intelligent woman. Perhaps she would even be a capable president. But no one is going to win the presidency by outlining, in mind numbing detail, their "solution based policies". Policy wonks don't win elections. If they did, Reagan and Dubya would never have been elected.

Many Americans make their decisions based on sound bites and how a candidate makes them feel. It's why negative ads work. This is how the general election will be won.