John McCain spreading fear about childhood vaccines

Which is exactly why I feel that electing him to the most powerful office in the world prior to him establishing a decent voting record would be a critical error.

If he's a solid candidate beyond all the hype (and I want to give him every chance to be), he will still be garnering support like this 8 years from now. There's no reason to rush the man into office before we actually know anything about him other than cliches, and a perceived (but not established) set of liberal views.

Some of our nation's most distinguished presidents (e.g., Lincoln, Eisenhower and Kennedy) lacked political experience when they took office. Conversely, many relatively ineffective presidents (e.g., Ford) had a good deal of political experience when they took office. So, while political experience is important, it shouldn't be a litmus test for who is and is not qualified to be our next president.

In my opinion, the qualities that separate good presidents from bad ones are intelligence, sound judgment, and charisma. Intelligence and sound judgment are of obvious importance. Charisma, however, is also very important. Our president is a chief of state who has to be able to "woo" the general public and foreign leaders. Our nation's faith in the president has a tremendous impact on our economy, the president's ability to push legislation through Congress, the public's faith in our system of government, and our nation's ability to deal effectively with other nations.

Obama is obviously intelligent, appears to have sound judgment and is obviously charismatic. I differ with Obama on many issues (he's far more liberal than I am), but ultimately, I am more concerned with how my president is going to handle unknown events and issues than whether he is pro-choice or anti-death penalty. IMO, Obama has the intelligence, judgment, and charisma to be able to effectively deal with crises that we don't anticipate.

Jsarno,

I certainly agree that we should look beyond race, gender, sexual orientation, etc. But, the simple fact is that very few, if any, of us are actually color blind.

But, I don't quite follow your logic about whether someone is a person of color or not. You laughed at the idea that there are "shades of color." Yet, you also said Obama is not really black. Do you then think that Obama is white?

Nope...he's neither. He's just a man named Obama.

Nope...he's neither. He's just a man named Obama.

You've recognized in the past that people are black or white. All of the sudden you're color blind? Come on, you can't honestly say, he's not black AND shades of black/white are silly.

Your comments suggest a deep ignorance of the history of racial classification in this country. Ever heard of the one drop rule? Probably not right? Please study history more carefully before you go patronizing people on message boards. As Obama himself said, when he's trying to hail a cab in New York it doesn't matter that he's biracial.

WHy would you ASSUME I didn't know that? I have a 142 IQ and a master's degree...I am educated sir.
Now, if you knew what the one drop rule stood for, you'd know it started back in the 1910's or so, and you'd also know it does not apply outside of the USA, only we american's are hell bent on dividing. The main reason for the "one drop rule" was to keep white blood pure, and avoid interracial relationships. It's also extremely outdated.
But hey, if you want to use that kind of system, cause you just HAVE to divide everyone, more power to you. Don't deflect buddy.

You've recognized in the past that people are black or white. All of the sudden you're color blind? Come on, you can't honestly say, he's not black AND shades of black/white are silly.

Not really...but I will use terms that you all use. How else would you know who I was talking about?
Also, when he's 50% of both, he is neither, or both...whatever. If you must use a label, try malatto (sp?).

Why does it even matter? Why do you insist on labels?

If a dog is 100% pug, then he's a pug, yet if he's 50% pug, and 50% pomeranian, then he's a mutt. Not a pug.

Not really...but I will use terms that you all use. How else would you know who I was talking about?
Also, when he's 50% of both, he is neither, or both...whatever. If you must use a label, try malatto (sp?).

Why does it even matter? Why do you insist on labels?

If a dog is 100% pug, then he's a pug, yet if he's 50% pug, and 50% pomeranian, then he's a mutt. Not a pug.

If I ever saw a dog that was half pug, half pom, it'd either be severely cute or punished ugly.

:) Just lightening the tension.

If I ever saw a dog that was half pug, half pom, it'd either be severely cute or punished ugly.

:) Just lightening the tension.

haha...yeah...true. There are some strange combo's out there though.

I actually don't see the point of continuing this conversation, it's going down a bad road, and it appears some can't see any other way of looking at things, and that's thier choice. No biggy. Anything about race is taboo in our country, you can't even talk about it without offending people. To me, there is only 1 solution, that's to break down that barrier. But I understand how others might not be ready, and some not willing.

WHy would you ASSUME I didn't know that? I have a 142 IQ and a master's degree...I am educated sir.
Now, if you knew what the one drop rule stood for, you'd know it started back in the 1910's or so, and you'd also know it does not apply outside of the USA, only we american's are hell bent on dividing. The main reason for the "one drop rule" was to keep white blood pure, and avoid interracial relationships. It's also extremely outdated.
But hey, if you want to use that kind of system, cause you just HAVE to divide everyone, more power to you. Don't deflect buddy.

Surely someone of your considerable erudition can recognize that I wasn't ADVOCATING the one drop rule, but rather, was trying to provide a historical frame for how we have traditionally understood and talked about race in this country.

But your posts have persuaded me and I am willing to move beyond race, like you. From now on race in America is not important. To paraphrase Steven Colbert, the only race that matters is American! Or to paraphrase you, there are no races, only mutts and purebreds.

haha...yeah...true. There are some strange combo's out there though.

I actually don't see the point of continuing this conversation, it's going down a bad road, and it appears some can't see any other way of looking at things, and that's thier choice. No biggy. Anything about race is taboo in our country, you can't even talk about it without offending people. To me, there is only 1 solution, that's to break down that barrier. But I understand how others might not be ready, and some not willing.

3 Things you can't talk about with people: Race, religion, politics. Or as I was told, "The 3 things you shouldn't talk about at the dinner table."

You're gonna end up pissing off people no matter what side you take when it comes to those things. :(

Surely someone of your considerable erudition can recognize that I wasn't ADVOCATING the one drop rule, but rather, was trying to provide a historical frame for how we have traditionally understood and talked about race in this country.

But your posts have persuaded me and I am willing to move beyond race, like you. From now on race in America is not important. To paraphrase Steven Colbert, the only race that matters is American! Or to paraphrase you, there are no races, only mutts and purebreds.


Sarcasm noted.

By the way, there is a huge difference between seeing shades of COLOR, and using color as a means of separation.