At least for the next five or so Presidential elections. Why? 'Cause he's black. He's still young, though...plenty of time to wait out this generation.

And yes, in our sick culture that makes him black.

Still.

I would rather vote for him than Hilary Clinton about 57 times over.

Of course, I live in Oklahoma, the state that would support Bush if he ate a baby on live TV. So it doesn't matter which Democrat runs in '08, my vote won't count.

Still, I would rather waste my vote on someone I want.

I was just making a point about whether my vote would count.

Well, in our culture being black sometimes does assume "African". I'd blame the PC "African-American" term for much of that misconception. I try to avoid such things, especially having "African-American" friends from Brazil and the Carribean and having a white South-African born and raised boyfriend.

That said, Obama's heritage is a bit more clean-cut. From CNN.com:

Obama also went to visit his grandmother Sarah, who told CNN beforehand, "The first thing I'll do is give him a big hug and tell him how proud we are of his achievements. " She said she had not seen her grandson for 14 years.

...

Nearby were the graves of his father and grandfather.

They shared a meal of roast meat and porridge with chicken and cabbage, according to AP.

"His success is really fantastic," AP quoted her as saying through her granddaughter Auma.

While Obama's father hails from this impoverished village in western Kenya, near Kisumu on the shores of Lake Victoria, his mother comes from Kansas. Obama's father died more than 20 years ago after moving back to Africa when Obama was very young.

Although his father was not in Obama's life for most of his childhood, the senator has talked openly about a sense of connection to his African heritage.

Obama has visited the region before, but this is the first time since his election to the Senate two years ago. The Kenya visit is considered the climax of his two-week, four-nation African tour, AP reported.

Are the Democrats crazy? Obama has next to no experience

and they're mentioning him as a Presidential candidate?

I'd like someone to list Obama's qualifications to become President.

That didnt seem to be a problem six years ago, but I forgot, since Bush loved Jesus and hes a good ole boy, its all good. That being said, Obama has been a dissapoinment, honestl I wish Durbin would run, but he wont, since the fact he does what he feels is right, hes not the typical senator, he probably wont run. Maybe for VP, oh well, theres always hope, but although it would be nice to have president that broke the mold, Durbin's not as much the classic overambitious politician (which unfortunately Obama is, going back to Chicago days with Mayor Washington) which is the very reason he would make such a good prez, but also the very reason he wont run.

You must be joking.

I'm not talking about Obama, I'm referring to the current occupant in the White House. Look at Bush's sorry list of life achievements and experiences. What among those "qualified" him to be President? I'll tell you: diddly squat. It's an unbroken string of failure and deceit. But nobody seemed to care, at least those who voted for him.

Americans don't care if a candidate is qualified, intelligent, decent; witness Al Gore and John Kerry. They do care about a candidate who says what they want to hear, and Bush did that well. I haven't seen one Democrat since Bill Clinton who has that talent. I don't know if Obama has it either, but if he does, Americans save the hard-core racists won't care about his black daddy.

As a dyed-in-the-wool Democrat, I thank the heavens that there is someone finally on the horizon that excites me in a way that JFK did for an earlier generation. I like Hillary and think she'd do a great job, but I'm already exhausted by the bashing. If she runs in '08, the Republicans will put such firepower into destroying her that the Swift Boaters will look like playground bullies shouting "cooties." Gore? Great, and on a karmic level deserves to serve in the office to which he was elected, but he is taking too long deciding. Kerry? Only after now saying that he'll kick the asses of those who sowed seeds of doubt about his medals, he only increases my anger that he did not do so in 2004. Edwards? Is there enough there there?

So I think that Obama should run; I do not think that it will decrease his chances, but much like JFK's bid for VP in '56, it may widen his appeal and raise his profile. And you know, after Bush, Harvard owes us something.

. . . black. though race is still a divisive issue in large swaths of the country, many of those areas are never going to vote democrat anyway, and my guess is that, should obama be on the ticket, there will be a lot of folks who don't traditionally vote in presidential elections that will be motivated to come out in support of obama, largely canceling the redneck racist vote and mobilizing higher voter participation in 'swing states' like ohio and florida.

the reason obama isn't right for the white house yet is the war. he'd likely be up against john mccain, whose active participation as a senator on numerous defense and foreign policy committees and his POW cred give him enormous rhetorical authority on the only issue that really matters.

disregarding a 'dead girl/live boy' scenario, obama seems destined for the white house. but we shouldn't set him up with an 0-1 record before he's had a chance to really distinguish himself. we always refer back to clinton when we want to talk about democrats who know how to win, but this sort of thinking seems to overlook the fact that clinton won his first election due to a series of enormously fortuitous circumstances: george h.w. bush's failure to honor his 'read my lips' promise; the entry of h. ross perot; the reluctance of popular democratic leaders like dick gephardt to enter the race against an imcumbent president coming off of a victorious 'war'; the fact that clinton's 'pussy problems' came out long before the primaries, when he wasn't even a contender, so they were essentially forgotten about before the real campaign got started; the ineptitude of his opponents in the primaries; george h. w. bush's obvious exhaustion and reluctance to campaign (checking his watch during debates; throwing up under the table in japan, etc.), and so forth.

bottom line: without ross perot, bill clinton never would have won. furthermore, obama won't be up against a faltering incumbent--he'll be up against an outsider to the bush administration, a guy who has wavered between tepid support of the president (solely to protect his own presidential ambitions) and thinly veiled contempt. mccain won't be damaged by bush's failures the way gore was damaged by clinton's. even if mccain is not the republican nominee, the only actual bush administration 'insider' whose name is being tossed around is condi, who has recovered a lot of credibility in the past two years and is both black and a woman--hillary and obama rolled into one, only on the wrong ticket.

i think mark warner gives us the best chance to win, and the best plan for the future: a guy who turned around a red state as governor with bipartisanship, a creative thinker and brilliant salesman, a guy who can apply succesful business models to contemporary problems and who can use his talent and vision to come up with a fresh plan for iraq and the economy. he's not as sexy as obama, and he's not as popular as hillary, but he's the one guy out there right now who has a real chance of winning the support of undecided voters.