mcgregor wrote: Is there any way for Salon to make ShawnWM shut the hell up? It's like watching a monkey masturbate, only more disturbing.-- mcgregor"

I don't know which is more disgusting: you joining with simians to jerk off or your troglodytic views.

In either event, best to but them both back in your pants.

Anyone who does NOT think that the Republicans will use the video of both Rev. Wright and Rev. Pfleger stomping on Hillary specifically and white people in general in ads against him...please raise your hand. Oh, while you're at it, please raise your other hand if you don't think they will ask why twenty years had to elapse before Barack Obama fled to the exits.

I didn't think so.

Dude! Good to see you are in your usual rare form this morning. Ha!

The Obama minions are quick to dismiss Obama's total disaster in Puerto Rico as "meaningless". He got hammered by Hispanics who prefer Hillary by more than 2 to 1. If Puerto Rico is so damned "meaningless"...why did he campaign so hard there?

I think Obama has a Hispanic problem, a white problem, a woman problem and a Reagan Democrat male problem. His surrogates, the Rev. Wright and the Rev. Pfleger, have only added insult to injury. Those YouTube videos are already being made into McCain campaign commercials. The only ones who DON'T think Obama has any problem at all are the core Obamaniacs who are, clearly, self-delusional.

Get ready for McGovern, Mondale, Dukakis, Gore and Kerry redux this year. Don't know about you, but, I'm damned sick and tired of having to get behind the party nominee each year (except Al Gore) who looks like a loser right out of the gate.

Annie wrote @AnaHadWolves If you were just offended by McGregor's insult, fine, that's your call. If you think you need to defend ShawnM, maybe you should have read some very disgusting posts of his that were yanked to understand some of the vitriol flung his way. He's not worth defending.-- AnnieW"

AnnieW, while I may disagree occasionally with the content of a writer's post, I defend absolutely his or her right to post that political commentary. How boring would it be if only a single viewpoint were allowed?

Try to remember that these are just opinions that you or I may or may not share; Salon has provided for a broad viewpoint to be shared. For that, we should all be grateful.

HP wrote: P.R. was a blow to Obama, but no one can say that their interests and voting habits suggest what Mexicans in CA, PR's in Philly, or Cubans in FL, or Dominicans in NYC will do. This is not - as GOP people on this board seem to think - a monolithic block that all vote the same way.-- HP"

Here's the fallacy of your argument: Obama is supported by estimates of 80% to 92% of blacks, many of whom openly admit that they're voting for him based on shared race and shared race alone. That sounds like a "voting bloc" to me.

I can also say that probably many people voted for Hillary because of her gender and her race. No denying that.

As for Hispanics, they represent about 22% of Americans while blacks represent only about 12% of Americans. That extra 10% translates to about 30 million more people of Hispanic origins than of African origins.

As for voting in a "bloc", I believe you are deluding yourself by not watching Univision, reading El Diario or El Mundo on a regular basis. I do. Remember when hundreds of thousands of those folks poured into the streets on the same day at the same time in over twenty US cities last May to protest immigration policies? They sure didn't get their marching orders from CNN!

All Hispanics may not vote in lock-step, but, so far, they're marching to Hillary's tune more than Barack's.

Just my opinion...

Dude. Seriously. Either you're going to have to stop with the colorful descriptors such as "Nobama parasites" and "rodentesque Nobama trolls"...or, I'm going to have to stop drinking my morning java while reading them.

I can only endure just so much coffee coming out of my nose.

Dick...

You make some excellent points about how and why Barack should reach out to the Hispanic community. It does make sense.

However, among the many fine points you made in your post, I believe that one simple fact was missing: blacks and Hispanics are competitors for many of the same unskilled, blue-collar jobs. Blacks complain (rightly) that many jobs that would otherwise would be theirs, are taken by undocumented, mostly-Hispanic workers who will do any job for fewer dollars. Hispanics counter (rightly) that many jobs go unfilled because some blacks simply will not do them, for whatever reason.

Therefore, we have a conundrum: two groups are competing against each other for jobs but need to work together for a common good but are not on the same page.

Just wanted to add this dynamic to your otherwise excellent post.