... whether a person is basing his or her vote solely on a fear or dislike of blacks ---

It is irrelevant if he or she prefers Clinton in the primaries. However, if the person calls himself or herself a true Democrat, but refuses to vote for Obama in the general election after he receives the party nomination, then this person is basing his or her decision on racial sentiments.

Like the Jon Stewart question to Obama that illuminated the whole unspoken feeling none of these panelists (all white, all male, all highly educated, all advantaged in life): "Will you enslave the white race?"

Isn't this what a lot (if not all) of the mudslinging about? Isn't this the real question underneath all the "black voters are racist" rhetorics?

I assume the three discussion participants are all white and male, the most privileged group in this country.

If you want to know whether slaves are well fed, clothed, and happy, and worship and love their masters --- ask the slave owners.

If a foreigner wants to find out whether different groups of people are treated equal, it would work real well to ask the dominant group. I'm sure they will tell you those lowly, inferior, less intelligent, dark-skinned people are getting way too many rights.

Give me break. This is why black Americans always feel they have no voice in this country, because they HAVE NO VOICE.

Why don't rural white people like Obama?

The entire article is about why rural white Americans have not voted Democrats. If the reason is the Democratic party has routinely ignored them, how would that prove Clinton would beat McCain in general election?

When these voters face a choice between a white woman and a black man, the majority have gone with the white woman. In general election when the choice is a white woman vs a white man, and the white man is constantly supported by FoxNews which these voters habitually watch every day, do you really think they would go for the white woman?

... to prove that Obama can't beat McCain but Clinton can? Unfortunately it is too late for him to convince Democrats that he is their caring, loving, trustworthy uncle and they can achieve success by doing whatever he tells them to ...

One has to wonder whether his tireless efforts to show how weak and useless Obama is hints at an underlying (gasp) worry? Concern? Fear?

I am not so bothered by the author's griping about Italy (I've been to Italy twice and I don't even speak the language but I loved every minute of it), but more by her general attitude about life and other people. The nagging undercurrent of low self-esteem and insecurity says obviously that this woman's problem is not about travel or Italy. She is probably just as unhappy in her back yard. The mix of envy and resentment toward her fellow writers, the quickness to take offense to a passing joke, the constant apology to her new husband for ruining his vacation, the hysteria over her children, the "I expect you to divorce me because we had a less-than-perfect vacation." I used to think Italy can make the shallowest and most picky travelers happy. Guess I was wrong!

Um, what about every person who voted for the politicians that you blame? What about the average people who democratically elected the President in 2004? What about every dollar from every taxpayer that went into the war? And this is not limited to Americans. Do you think you are innocent just because you don't like it now?

There aren't enough of you to get her into the White House in November if black voters sit out the general election.

McCain does not need black voters. Clinton does.

But oh no, nobody cares about that question. Why? Because most white media personnel and readers have little or no problem with Hagee's view.

Funny, isn't it? Wright is damaging not only Obama but also Hillary Clinton. Why? Because Hillary Clinton is losing more and more black voters in general election every day, should she become the Democratic nominee. (Although this is not immediately obvious to white voters, black politicians have been pointing it out.) Meanwhile, Obama is losing more and more white voters in general election should he win the nomination.

One has to wonder: Who actually sent Rev. Wright? Who does he really serve?

This is indeed what the election will be about: women vs men, black vs white. This is exactly what Republican attack ads are trying to do: Provoke the dorment fear in white Americans that once elected, Obama (or any black man) will "enslave the white race." Jon Stewart's Daily Show has pinpointed the heart of the matter, but no one else in the media dares to pick it up. Even if there were no Rev. Wright, something else would have been brought up to remind white voters of their fear of the black man.

Let the real color of every voter show. The sentiment and interpretation of each person on Obama's candidacy in regard to the "Wright controversy" reflect less about Wright and Obama, but more about the person's own view of racial conflicts in this country.

Let's not kid ourselves that just because a black man is one of the frontrunners in the presidential campaign, this country is free of self-delusion about racism. The longer this debate goes on, the more the true colors come out -- what the real state of racial relations is in this country, not what people would like them to be.