Cathy Arnst, a contributor to BusinessWeek's Working Parents blog, says she grew up in a town even smaller than Sarah Palin’s, a burg of 2,000 people in the Allegheny Mountains—an area of New York State officially classified as part of Appalachia.

She eloquently writes about life among "intolerant, close-minded and hypocritical" smalltownsfolk here: http://www.businessweek.com/careers/workingparents/blog/archives/2008/09/proud_to_be_an.html

Yep, them Russkies know what they're doing at election time.

The best way to make sure only the right people report the news correctly and vote correctly is to murder a large enough number of the dissenters so the rest of them get the message you are having so much trouble spreading here, which, of course is that you know what's best for us. Only you.

I'm very troubled by this so-called small town America reaction. Obama is a smart guy. He has a great education and was a respected professor. But he has real-world experience too from the state and U.S. senate. Isn't that what we want after years of having the country run by Cheney since Bush wasn't smart enuogh to do the job? And at least Biden is an experienced, qualified and decent running mate. Let's get back to the issues. Enough about personalities.

harbor any inaccurate views about Obama's religion. It's been stated a zillion times he's not a Muslim. Only hard-core right-wingers cling to that falsehood and they too know it's not accurate.

What I think is wrong for Obama in small-towns and with working class people is his inability for the entire summer, after Clinton concluded her campaign, to identify his core set of convictions about why these voters need to vote for him, and how their lives will be different if they elect him.

We know that these voters like candidates with strong convictions, whether they agree with all of them or not. Obama, for all the laudatory comments about his speech-making capabilities, seems to not be able to articulate a set of convictions that he will enact in the first 100 days if elected. When you don't know what a guy/gal stands for, how you get excited about what he/she will do for your life?

What a stinging criticism.

All I'm advocating for is an electorate that knows the issues.

If you're an abortion-hating, pre-emptive strike loving, tax-cuts-for the-wealthy kind of guy and you can identify how the respective candidates view the issues, more power to you. America is Red and Blue - no getting around that.

A person's true values, however, don't have any pull in an election if said person doesn't actually know what they're voting for.

For example: many Republicans lend support to the McCain campaign because of his stance on taxes. And we're not just talking the wealthy here - there are plenty of struggling folks in this country who think McCain is their man on taxes - and that's because McCain himself has repeated the mantra that "Democrats will raise your taxes". Obama, meanwhile, has outlined a platform that would see tax cuts extended to lower- and middle-class Americans, while the Bush tax cuts (for the wealthiest among us and yes, businesses) would be allowed to expire. These voters, in spite of the facts, are swayed by campaign rhetoric. You can delve all you want into the supply-side tax argument, but the simple fact remains that Obama's tax cuts are far more inclusive than McCain/Bush's. Voters should, but don't know that. And of course this stuff goes both ways.

If you're a fan of obfuscation and misinformation, I'm sorry to ruffle your feathers. If you want an electorate that's swayed by meaningless appeals to personal similiarity with a candidate, sorry again. If you want our country's future placed in the hands of the uninformed election after election, I've just got to disagree with you.

Moscow? Really?

Finding more and more of them, who won't vote for him "just in case".

Dan,

Here's a question for you. How many black people did you interview and ask if they would vote for a white person based on the issues rather than the color? Woops, excuse me, it's automatically racism if a white doesn't vote for a black person. Question is did you take your trip after Obama made the remark small town folks cling to their guns and religion, that statement probably would make a little difference in the way they think, wouldn't you think.

As usual the liberal press continues to keep the fire burning on racism.

Yes, there are people who think Obama is a Secret Muslim - Finding more and more of them, who won't vote for him "just in case".

Sure, sure... but I know for a FACT that McCain is secretly an eye-patch wearing Cylon - so what do they say to that?

How about this slogan: "Vote for the White Half!"

I'm not as convinced as Hoyle in the good faith of my fellow citizens. When you're looking for a justification not to vote for the better qualified black candidate, you can always find something. Its a rare person who will directly tell the interviewer that he doesn't want to vote for "one of them" because "they'll be out of hand if he gets in." So instead you say, "I'm more comfortable with McCain, I know him, I've seen him for years, and he's not radical", blah blah blah. Maybe you even convince yourself, and you ignore the tonnage of lies emanating from the former straight-talker's mouth. Its amazing to me that we are realistic as to how dishonest people can be in their everyday affairs, from doing their taxes to the adultery rate, but in voting, we're supposed to believe that everyone's so damn civic minded and sincere. We get the government we deserve, and man do we ever.

If it isn't racism, then it sure sounds like ignorance and laziness.

Folks would rather hear “facts” than read about them and if that is what they are told, then it must be true.

These are the people who would rather be able to rub elbows with their president than look up to them for guidance. Scary.