If Barack Obama does not win Indiana and or North Carolina, conventional wisdom would say he lost the votes of the blue collar voters and his affiliation to the Rev. Wright. It might be true. I cannot even begin to try and defend the negative effect of Rev. Wright on the Obama campaign. Yet to say that his massive drop should be attributed to it is a slap to my face and an insult to my intelligence.

Obama clearly mangled his words when he spoke in San Francisco. But to say that he is elitist because of those words is very troubling especially coming from Hillary and John McCain who make millions of dollars and have always been fed with silver spoons. A single-mother grand-parents raised boy who has fought his way through the American dream and is now trying to make that dream available again to others is now being branded as elitist and out of touch? Come on America! Who is out of touch? Someone who for 30 years plus has not known how to get gas from the pump or someone who shares your same kind of frustrations and aspirations? Or is it different because the color of his skin does not tell the same story.

I know blue collar voters who have consciences and are honest people. If you were for Obama before today, I don't see why Rev. Wright should be a reason for your change of mind except of course you cannot come out honestly and face the beast-RACE! Yes I said it. That is the unspoken reason that most people are running from. Even Hillary is encouraging it and calling it "blue collar" workers. It is inherent in them no wonder why Bill Clinton would throw it out there when he gets frustrated. "From the abundance of the heart of the heart the mouth speaketh." Rev. Wright has given them an excuse to do what they had been planning to do but did not know how.

Are we saying that the values of the America that some of us have so fondly come to adopt are really not what we thought them to be? That your values could be judged and condemned from your association with a man who has a dual side of him, some good and some bad. Are we saying that it is better to lie about something like buffing up a resume to be commander-in chief than to be a friend to someone who says bad things? Do we hold some people more responsible for their association than we do with others especially if they are different? Where are the standards? Yes he has been in that Church for several years and so the people of that church should all be condemned. It is Obama who is running for office not them. If he had left that church it wouldn't have been his kindergarten essay for the Clinton campaign to use to say how much he had been eyeing that office. Yes! Because in this campaign apparently he is the only one who has always wanted to be president even when others have been supportive of despicable acts that should have carried moral judgment had it not been for political ambitions.

That said, let me just hypothetically say like Hillary is doing that Obama is not electable. And let me go further like some others are saying that Obama cannot beat John McCain. My question after all these assumptions would be simple.

SO WHAT? Yes, if we had all these scenarios yet we are where we are, what should the party do? Steal the nomination from him because the DNC has to win at all cost or give it to him and see what might happen. Hey, let me say that Hillary would beat McCain in the general. The question is what did she do all through this primary to show that. She ran a clumsy and foiled campaign. Remember she said some states were not important.  Although America is a Union, some members of the Union are less equal than others and therefore some people are less equal than others. From her statements and actions that is what it is tantamount to.

Anyway, if Hillary puts forward her argument that she can beat McCain and the super delegates buy the argument could they REALLY give the nomination to her? If she thinks they can and should, why did she need to run this primary election? Couldn't we just have looked at people and their resume and just SELECT a nominee? This would not  be the first time selecting although the first time it was the Supreme Court selecting the President and guess who wasn't happy- The Democratic Party.

The party asked people to run a campaign. We had formidable candidates run their campaign. An underdog came along and almost ran with it before sniper fires came shooting at him. He dodged some and had a bruising no doubt. Yet he still ran along. Hillary has played over the intelligence of the super delegates so much that I begin to worry that loyalty should trump reasoning and goodwill. Obama has done everything he can to show his worth. If the American people reject him because of his association, that is rather unfortunate. The BOY has become the MAN. To deny him would be an injustice to him and to the people who have come out in ALL states to vote for him. He is ahead in all the parameters that were laid out for the contest. If they think Hillary is better, then they should be blaming her for not running a well organized campaign and not punish Obama for doing a great job managing his.

But what I know is that if he had already won the nomination before Hillary started throwing her fires and giving it to others, the DNC would rally around their nominee to fight it off. He has brought millions to the fold and nobody can take that away from him. There is no magic wand to know who would really beat McCain. Hillary did not deliver all along. He delivered. To refuse him the nomination now, would be killing the DNC base which Obama has expanded and an insult to Human Rights and Liberty. We the people were asked to decide. They, the big guns have an option to UPHOLD or OVER TURN! We the people are watching if the DNC is saying that Primaries and Caucuses are important and that rules are rules whether they favor a person or not. LA LUTTA CONTINUA and the people are still speaking. I entreat you all to vote for a person and not against his color or gender. LET THE PEOPLE DECIDE!

Support Eyes On Obama!

Back to Blogs