I loved the woodchipper analogy.

You're right - there is no substantive engagement to be had with the likes if Indigo. I just wonder what s/he thinks s/he is accomplishing here. I've been fighting the urge to ignore this fool all day, but some of Indigo's posts are just too ridiculous to leave alone.

Indigo!

"I am anti sweeping generalization devoid of any common sense that people like you represent." - You've been doing this all day.

BTW, what does the RNC pay someone to sit around and post junk on blogs all day?

"yes he's interested because it's a powerful position, not because it entails hard work and dedication."

On what grounds to you base this assertion? Did Rush send you a deck of Republican talking-point flash-cards?

One of the CNN pundits last night mentioned that Republicans tend to nominate presidential candidates when it is their "turn." Is this what you're upset about? - That it just isn't Obama's turn yet?

"Hillary at least has shown us she's a hard worker and has actually worked for the betterment of many people and she's been around long enough to know what it takes to be president and she ACTUALLY proves it with her comprehensive plan (though y'all will dismiss it no doubt). Yet she's criticized of being evil, ambitious, etc..."

If we were electing a Health Care Czar, she might well have my vote. The presidency is far more complex than that. Obama was smart enough to know that the Iraq invasion would be a disaster and he had the character to vote that way. This is a key area where Clinton failed for many people. I also find it odd that you lament the fact that some people criticize Hillary as being ambitious while you criticize Obama for being ambitious. What's up with that.

"How can you trust that this guy is not just interested in the power, instead of serving and working for the people?"

You could ask the very same question of anybody running for public office.

"we do believe it's risky to give him the power of presidency when that's the only thing he's obviously interested in (otherwise he would have waited)."

Why would somebody run for President who isn't interested in the job? That's just insane.

Your point? What point? You've been spewing absolute bullshit all day and I don't see a point yet.

So, why don't you answer my question? That is, how do you figure Obama's presumtive nomination has anything to do with Affirmitve Action? You've been dodging that question all day. Go ahead and answer. It's okay. I can't jump through the computer and hurt you, as much as I might want to.

Most of us just want an adult in the White House. If that person happens along in the form of a black guy, that might be an added bonus to some people. The rest of us don't give a fuck if he's purple.

In typical Right-wing fashion, you are trying to make an issue where there is none. It's a distraction, just like all of your family-values bullshit. What is left of your Republican Revolution has become so corrupted and intellectually vacant that even the likes of Rupert Murdoch are predicting a major landslide for the Democrats in November.

"I can't help you for being vapid and clueless yourself."

Fuck you.

"To know my arguments, dig my old posts. Should I show you how to do it too? Geezz..."

Why the fuck would I waste my time?

"I can't repeat myself ad nauseaum..."

1) Yes you can.

2) Learn how to spell.

It looks like you have spent the entire day posting ultra-right-wing screeds here. What do you think you have accomplished? Your time would have been better spent in the bathroom with some vaseline and a picture of Hillary in a saran-wrap pantsuit.

(For the third time.) Can you please explain how it is that Obama's presumtive victory is an Affirmitive Action product, as you have repeatedly asserted? I'm curious as to exacty what kind of twisted logic you employ to come up with such a ridiculous idea. You probably find this question threatening, hence your inability to respond to it.

Congratulations! You found a black man who doesn't like Obama. Neither did Alan Keyes. This proves exactly nothing.

Obama did not get where he is because he's black. One could easily make the argument that he is where he is IN SPITE of the fact that he's black.

I have to hand it to you, though. There is no shortage of morons who post at Salon, but your comments have been some of the most consistently vapid that I've seen in a long time.

Or, maybe you could just hand it to yourself...

Your rants are so stupid and baseless, it's hardly worth engaging you.

Just for the record, though, could you answer this: How, exactly, is Obama an Affirmitive Action candidate? How were the principles of Affirmitive Action applied to his winning people's votes? How the hell would that even be possible?

I'll leave you to sulk now.

How, exactly, is it that someone who wins his job via an election in which all of the state's registered voters are free to vote for him, against him, or not at all, is a beneficiary of Affirmitive Action?

And, just to put one on-going argument to rest: There are exactly 2 qualifications one needs to be President - 1) must be at least 35 years old, and 2) must be a natural-born American citizen, whatever the hell that means.