History is Not Boring discussion

Some may feel this post is inappropriately placed, but I think it is the perfect place to notice this current event, which is history in the making. Obama won!

Even five years ago, would anyone have guessed this could happen, now? Imagine history books' reflections on this event in the coming years...awesome!

I feel this post is in the correct place!

What are Americans most exited about?
The fact a racial barrier has been destroyed?
The fact the Bush dynasty has ended?
The fact a Democrat got elected?
Giant turnout from what I'm hearing over here. I had visions of a replay of the last one until I started hearing about numbers of folk turning up at the booths. Maybe there's life in democracy yet, but I think the polarisation of the candidates helped. If the candidates are too similar I think apathy kicks in, "What difference does it make whether I vote or not?" If it had just been 2 rich WASPS again, how would folk know who to vote for?
Having said all that, I hope he lives up to the expectations. I remember when the sexual barrier was broken in the UK and Thatcher got in...she turned out to be less than perfect.
I think he's well aware the US and the world are watching though. Good luck to him.
Congratualtions on your new president America, it is Hx in the making.

For me, this vote was my only opportunity to revenge myself on Bush. Hopefully Obama will clean up the mess, but I am not particularly optimistic on that score. But I'm not the typical American.

In the Baltimore area, the demolition of a major racial barrier is the reason for a lot of joy [and painfully long lines at the polls.:] A lot of us are just delighted that the bad old days of sheets and flames are, if not gone, receding into history.

Why am I happy?

We broke a great barrier I never thought I would see go in my lifetime.
We managed NOT to elect either a Bush or a Clinton.
I usually lean Democrat, so this makes up for 1980, where watching the returns was like enduring a series of punches in the stomach. (Don't even mention 1984, please.)

I did vote for a Republican for Senate, as I think he's doing a good job, and the Democrat was a wacko.

I'm also happy because my state was NOT voting on gay marriage or abortion, and did vote to raise the age of consent from 14 to 16.

The turnout here in S.C. seems to have been heavy, but I don't know the exact figures. I certainly have never before waited in line for an hour and a half to vote, and from what I heard on the local news, I was lucky to only wait that long. (I went to vote at mid-morning, which was probably wise on that count.)

In 9th grade i did a book report on Martin Luther King Jr.

I was horrified as a white child growing up in the North by slavery and the continuing discrimination.

I watched the civil rights movement unfold and for me, even though I was a total cynic in terms of Obama and the political system, the impact was immediate and beyond what I anticipated.

My whole concept of the world has changed. I did not think we would elect a black president in this generation.

I am so proud right now of America.

It doesn't matter for me if he turns out to be the biggest, lying, crook, president of the century.

America has redeemed itself in my eyes.

I also am very thankful to be free of the Republicans, but it pales in true contemplation of the historic step we just took. We have overcome.

I dont expect miracles from an Obama administration, but I feel as if there is finally someone that represents my generation in the White House.

For the first time in 8 years I felt so very proud to be an American. It feels so great to finally have a country and a president respected by the rest of the world.

I am a first generation American, my parents came from Mexico. Last night as we watched the election results on the Spanish language networks, we were all overcome with emotion. Only in America could something this fantastic have happened without troops in the streets.

It feels fantastic 130 million of us went to the polls.

I was especially struck by the crowds in Chicago, they were made up of all of us
Whites, Blacks, Asians, Hispanics, young and old.
Compare the scene with the make up of McCain's crowd in Phoenix, almost all Whites.

It was exhilarating.

I'm not US American (I'm Chilean), but last night was truly History in the making. I stayed up until almost 4am (local time) to fully convince myself that this was happening.

I listened to McCain's speech, which I found really classy. I honestly hadn't expected him to acknowledge defeat so gracefully and am glad that he ended it in a concilliatory note.

I listened to Obama's speech and couldn't help thinking that last night proved that the mythical American Dream that everyone hears about even beyond US borders is still alive and kicking (albeit a little weakly). Has it only been a little over 50 years ago since the bus boycott took place???


The USA has come a long way since then.


Congratulations to you all :)

I agree Andrea I was suprised by McCain's being humble I have a bit more respect for him! And yes it is awesome to have taken part in this election I cried tears of joy when I heard! And im just so proud and excited at the moment its time for the young to have a shot!

Ffor me, the best part was in the later stages of the campagne when everyone seemed to forget Obama was African American & treated him like any other polition. I remember my mother & how she used to cut out Eleanor Roosevelt/s"My Day" columns from the paper & paste them in a big scrapbook. I also remember Eleanor Roosevelt resigning from the DAR when they didn't let Marian Anderson sing in their hall. My mother also resigned but she had never been active, her membership was a gift from her aunt & she was a little embarassed by it. I have lived long enough to see an African American ELECTED president. (The story used to be that maybe he would be vice president & the president would die & so on.....)

Manuel, we need some Hispanic-Americans warming up!!

McCain's speech was so good, you have to wonder where this person was hiding during the campaign. He was clearly being "handled" during the election and pretty much stuck to whatever message he was given and it cost him dearly. It badly undercut the "maverick" mantra that the Republicans chanted throughout the campaign, no doubt because it did very well with test groups.

But in the end, he lost and Obama won, because the Republican campaign was all about fear, and the Democratic campaign was all about hope, and it turned out more people were afraid of the Republicans staying in power than they were of Obama, the Muslim Socialist terrorist gaining it.

The Republicans have been all about fear for a long time. Fear of terrorism, fear of homosexuals, fear of secularism, fear of crime, fear of foreigners, etc., etc. etc. And it largely worked, quite obviously. Since Bush came in office, it's largely been, you have everthing to fear, except fear itself.

The Republicans did their damnedest not to speak to issues because on almost anything of any importance to the general public, there were no major issues than didn't damn them, at this moment in time anyway. So, it was all about character, much of it obviously contrived and all too often trivial beyond belief. McCain and the party couldn't tell you why you should vote for them, so they stuck to why you shouldn't, couldn't possibly really, vote for Obama. So, while the world appeared to be going up in flames economically, McCain and the party only wanted to play tunes about Ayers on their fiddles. We need to know more about Ayers, and his close connections to Obama. Ayers was a dangerous radical, hated America, ok 40-50 years ago, but there it is, and therefore, Obama must be too. The fact that maybe 1 or 2 percent of the American public could remember or tell you anything about Ayers, made it even better, because there wasn't anyone who could contradict them.

Obama spoke to dreams, McCain spoke to nightmares. Perhaps both dreams and nightmares will prove to be ephemeral. but, sometimes, it is nice to dream.

Thanks to all for celebrating this moment with me. I was born smack in the middle of the boomer generation. I attended college smack in the middle of the Viet Nam War, Civil Rights movement and the feminist movement. My career put me smack in the middle of the Middle-Eastern-oil/Opec conflict. I wrote and published, "Shifting Sands; A Clash of Cultures" smack in the middle of Bush's administration and two wars.

As with all stories, there needs to be a good ending. We just made all those struggles come to fruition. Now, we write a great ending to this story! Oh, there will be sequels -- but this final chapter, which I so wanted to help write, is now being written! Thank you.

Marian and everyone else

Obama is not African American. His whole mom side is white. He is 50-50 black and white. That is like calling him white and another white president got elected. He is our first mixed president and nothing is wrong with saying that. I am tired of the media and everyone saying he is African American. He is not. When the first pure African American gets elected then we can say that is the first African American.

I am not taking anything away from him, just

Does it matter if he is "mixed" "African American" or anything else? I didn't vote for him so I don't have a horse in this race. I will say; voted for or not, He is now MY president and I will do what I can to make sure his presidency is successful. Part of that is (IMO) getting people off this kick that some how race is an important issue, bull. His actions are important, not his skin tone.

It was an incredible night - I told our seven-year-old grandson to pay close attention, as it become clear early on that we were seeing an event that will be remembered as one of the most important in American history and in the young 21st century.
I agree with Marian's point that it was wonderful to see most people looking at Obama as a politician first instead of being stuck on race. That is a milestone.
Also, as others noted, in his concession speech McCain had the finest and most principled moment of his whole campaign. I kept thinking, as I was watching, "Why weren't you like this during the campaign?" I'm glad Obama won, but if McCain had behaved as positively, respectfully, and articulately over the last several months as he did on Tuesday night, he'd have done a lot better in the election.

Two other major milestones stand out to me: first, although before every election for decades now, people have told pollsters they hate attack ads and negative campaigning, until 2008 those tactics still worked. This year, for the first time, voters apparently not only felt that revulsion at the nastiness, but they used their votes to say so. It finally backfired.

Second, a strictly personal one - Obama is the first presidential candidate I've seen that is younger than me. I've got about three years on him, or he has three years on me, and I have a lot of respect for what he has accomplished in his life so far. The media kept pointing out that if elected McCain would have been older than any previous first-term president, but to me the this-guy-is-younger-than-I-am-and-he's-headed-for-the-White-House! factor caught my attention more.

Right on servius the issues are much more important than his skin color!!!And I would have to say if your father is African and your mom is american your a African American!lol

In America, even if your white ancestors came over on the Mayflower, your black ancestors make you BLACK.

The wonderful thing about the election, is that race didnt matter.

Well, I don't think it's possible to say that race didn't matter. It is possible and obvious to say it wasn't the determining factor in the end. If you take a look at the popular vote across the South, it's very apparent that it did matter, both to the the White populace and to the Black populace. McCain did get the majority of the White vote across the US and Obama got the overwhelming majority of the Black vote. I don't think that race wasn't a factor in either case. However, Obama was far better able to appeal beyond racial lines and to appeal to independent voters as well. Clearly the electorate didn't look only at race, and for many people, it really didn't matter.

Personally, I think the question of whether Obama is African American or not is a bit silly. As others have pointed out, traditionally Americans have regarded anyone with any African heritage as being Black, or African American. Plus, given the fact that Whites and Blacks have lived side by side in the US for over 300 years, most Black Americans have at least some European heritage and a lot more White Americans than realize it have Black and other non-Caucasian heritage as well. Racial purity in its strictist sense is mostly myth. So, waiting for someone of completely African heritage to become president may prove to be quite a wait.

a little black segregates
and a black president is seismic change
the last bastion breached
the littlest child safe from the great lie
that color stains

You are misunderstanding what I am saying Servius Sextus Heiner. I don't care if he is mixed or whatever. I am just saying he is not going to be the first African American president that the media and other common people on TV interviews or blogs say he is. For the record I don't think Obama has ever claimed to be African American.

And for Mole(Tim)- I hear what you are saying and makes sense, but a white kid born in Africa (parents American) got suspended in HS last year running for class president when he said he was African American. How fair is that?

Manuel-race did play a huge role in the votes. I am not sure where you are from, but the interviews I saw in MD had African Americans, blacks, whatever say they are voting for Obama because he is black. That was local news channels and the network news. I am not saying all people who are black voted because of this, but I am sure there were a lot of folks voting that way, since Obama got a huge % of the black vote. The only thing I can say I couldn't imagine the backlash it would have been if a white voter said I am voting for McCain because he is white.

Again I am not taking anything away what Obama did, his great speeches, the way he moves people, etc. I am just making conversation.

For the most part I think you are correct Joseph.

I should have made my statement more clear. Yes he is an American Black man, but he didnt win BECAUSE he is black, he won despite his race because he was the best candidate.

In this country you are black no matter what your percentage of mixed blood.

Jefferson's slaves/children by Sally Hemmings were 3/4 white, but they were still considered black.

Today 75% of African Americans come from mixed race ancestors.

in addition
the critical mass
and the defining moment came together
as it did not for other recent democratic candidates
including that the inter-party bickering was republican this time and the financial crisis and the wars were undeniably a republican issue

Well, the US has had a fair amount of racial tension for most of its history, and still this happened. But, you have a very different voting system, where Prime Ministers are always head of the party. So, it may be very difficult for someone to work their way up in the system to even get to that point. However, that doesn't make it impossible if the right person comes around.

Your saying a white african got suspended for claiming his heritage? If so thats some B.S your skin color doesnt change your heritage I have a white african friend and he is very proud of his heritage!

A few points:

Obama is African American. His father was from Africa. If his father was from Ireland, he would be Irish American (JFK).

My joy is that America didn't care if he is black or white but elected him to lead us out of a difficult period in our history.

There is a lot of talk about huge voting turn-outs, but the numbers show that the increase from 2000 and 2004 (of eligible voters) was only about 1.5%.

Obama will not be perfect, no one is; he's said as much. I am already in disagreement with some of the Democrats on how to proceed. It's great!

We still have many battles before us, but we just made a huge leap on civil rights issues, and Hillary moved us on feminist issues (I'm not sure if Palin did); now we move on to other battles. I love America!

Although I voted for Sen McCain, I can appreciate the enormous significance of Mr Obama's election. I was proud of my country the days before, the day of and will be all the days after this election. Our country is not perfect nor will she every be perfect. But there are so many special reason why so many people from across the globe do extraordinary things to come here and be part of her. Together we all move forward towards that more perfect union.

As a side-bar. JFK's father and grandfather were both was born in America.

I agree with Will, we all just witnessed history. No matter which side you voted for - it's time to read up on the President-elect. There are 115 books on Obama (at least two of them are autobiographies). We should put some on this group's bookshelf.

Marco,
It may not be a realistic possibility for a person of color to become PM in Britain at the moment, but that can and probably will change with time. Until recently, there was no serious chance of it in the U.S. either.
I hope that Obama's election, as well as the campaign of Hillary Clinton, help move the U.S. and the rest of the world closer to a situation where we really just look at a person's qualifications and character without regard to ethnicity or gender. Until we do, we're not only perpetuating injustice, we're wasting talent we need.

Andy, I considered putting in grandfather, great grandfather, etc. but thought it made the point messy. My point is that we associate our heritage from its immigrant source; Obama's being partly African, or more correctly--Kenyan. Joe Biden is proud of his Irish heritage as Obama is proud of his Kenyan heritage. That doesn't make them any less American.

Remembering back, electing an Irish American Catholic was an enormous leap in the sixties. We think of that as strange, now. Future generations will think it strange that we saw Obama's election as historic.

What is the next barrier we'll break? Female glass ceiling? Gay president? I think the female-president-issue has been settled...just not culminated. Others will disagree, I'd guess.

I can imagine Asian American presidential candidates or Indian Americans, etc. in our future, with little discussion of their heritage, just their policies. Although I do have high hopes for the success of Obama's administration (despite the difficult circumstances), it's that we managed to put behind us one more battle of division that I celebrate here.

Mole (Tim) I am saying that happened and was like wow, everyone is just so PC in the US now.

Manuel- I am not saying Obama won because he is black or mixed, but it helped that he was as he won a huge % of the black population vote. I also think his team ran an incredible campaign that focused more on his vision, and McCain being a Republican and thus tied to Bush and some of the mess that office has left everyone and not his (Obama's) lack of experience. It is a matter of opinion if he was the best candidate, but he won the election and the votes so those who voted for he thought that.

What I think is amazing is McCain got the second most votes in history and lost to the person that had the most votes in American history for an election. I understand our population has increased of the years, but that is still crazy to think that. It is nice to see people voting for a change.

Yes he got a huge percentage of the black vote, but you have to remember most Black people tend to vote Democratic since FDR was in office.

I suppose some people did vote for him because of his race, but I still think people tended to vote for him because THEY FELT he was the better candidate not because he was the black candidate.

And in the end you have to remember there are more white voters than black ones, and they also voted for him,

as did first time voters
as did women voters
as did latino voters
as did Catholic voters
as did college age voters
as did suburban voters


I think it was a combination of several factors and not just race that determined the vote outcome:
economy
war
Bush
etc etc

I agree its great to see huge numbers of people voting again. I hope its a trend that we as citizens can maintain.

Will sorry if I seemed pedantic about the lineage of the Kennedy Clan. I soemthimes think the legacy of JKF & RFK are clouded and perhaps overrated because of their tragic deaths. Before there was a JFK (1960's) there was an inredible New York politican named Al Smith who faced enormous amounts of religious bigotry when running for high office in 1928. FDR learned a "great deal" from Gov Smith's social programs

FDR also learned a fair amount from Huey Long's programs. Lousiana was on the skids well before the rest of the nation, and Huey had all sorts of public works projects going. Huey was very helpful to FDR in getting the nomination and supported him in the South during the election.

It's true that Al Smith ran and was defeated, probably because he was Catholic; I don't have any personal memory of it.

I responded to the comment that Obama isn't African American. He is. He, however, was not a "black condidate" IMO, however. There is a difference.

As to JFK and RFK, I admit I was not a huge fan of either. I mourned their deaths, but disagreed with their commitment to what I still consider "the welfare state."

I did and still believe that we can't be a successful society by rewarding poor behavior--not working, not commiting to an education, bad investment decisions, not building vehicles to fit the market, etc.

I am still celebrating the recent election results. As psrt of my celebration, I am making a commitment to help form how America proceeds in the coming difficult years.

Just for the record, despite a lot of talk about the increase in the number of voters; there was just over one percent increase in the percentage of eligible voters this time over the past two elections. There was an (ap.) equal increase in votes for the Democrat among whites and blacks.

One significant piece of irony: when JFK ran, many people were worried about whether he would be so loyal to his religion that he would try to turn Catholic dogma into U.S. government policy, and he had to go out of his way to promise that he would not let his official decisions be driven by his faith. The last few times around, we saw the opposite, a number of candidates competing to see who could most enthusiastically push a religious agenda if elected.

Yes, ironic...not gone unoticed. I have nothing against our leaders having religion in their lives. I do resent it when they insist their religious views are correct and should be the basis of our government's laws, rules, and practices.

I stray from the thread title's subject, but not so much...I hope. We are in a new era of governing, and religion being the center-piece of some recent campaigns, so....

My little brother and his partner seized the opportunity to be married in California, recently. We gathered and celebrated their marriage, then it was ripped from them in a vote over religion-driven "morality". He was hurt and angered. I don't blame him.

I dislike abortion, but support "choice" on a pragmatic approach to the issue. When abortion is illegal, abortions are driven into the back alleys. In my opinion, based on my religion, couseling and support of someone in a difficult situation is a better way to diminish abortions than making them illegal.

My point isn't that my more compassionate approach on abortion or my embracing of gay marriage is right, it's that it is based on my religious understanding. I'm convinced that my understanding is best and others feel their understanding is best, and both are religion-based. My religious understanding will probably not change much and others' will not change. How can we proceed, together? Can we? Will we?

I do believe there is common ground. I do believe that Obama can lead by seeking commonality and compromise. It won't be easy. At times, it won't be fun. The end result may not make everyone happy.

If I rambled here, I apologize. My point is: Please, let's all look for ways to co-exist peacefully, while looking for good answers to difficult questions in our future, for our children and grandchildren's futures. Please!

Excellent point James! I always question how someone who has strong religious convictions can can not include their faith in making important policy decisions. MLK for instance, no one (rightly so) questions or criticizes him for dargging religion into the civil rights movement. Yet, political figures (President McKinley--VP Dan Quayle) are soemtimes mocked for asking for religious guidance before making important policy decisions (Spanish-American War). I am not exactly sure how one can separate the two and I am suspicious of soemone who say they can.

All good points...an interesting discussion, thanks.

Could we or should we seperate religion from governing? I say we can and should.

Can we or should we seperate our religion from our decisions? I say we shouldn't and can't.

Should we impose our religion on others? I say, "No." Government cannot (and should not) impose religious dictates on the People, thankfully, but it can't nor shouldn't restrict our religion, either.

Question is: Are these two compatible, and will we ever get past religious divisions?

On another subject; I'm watching the different opinions of what Obama should do on the economy, health care, investigations of the Dept. of Justice, etc., etc. Sheesh! The new administration hasn't even begun and there is enough bickering to fill an entire term. Good luck!

The Founders did their best to separate religion from law-making, because they'd seen enough of the perpetual bloodshed and oppression that government support of various faiths had caused in Europe - before the Revolutionary war some of the colonies that became states did have official religious denominations and laws that gave those churches preferential treatment. That caused a lot of injustice, hard feelings, and at times bloodshed, and they knew it had to go when they created a national Constitution.

I, too, have a hard time seeing how a person to whom his/her religion is the central aspect of life could possibly set that aside in making policy as an elected official. Dr. King never ran for office, and that's good - the first loyalty of an officeholder should be to the Constitution, not to any church or deity. If that's not the case, taking the oath of office is an act similar to perjury.

I am resigned to the belief that we will never be without religious conflicts. Myself, I see spirituality as a wonderful thing, but not religion; all religions are man-made systems aimed at finding a systematic, cookbook-like way to achieve spirituality. They attract adherents by offering the sense of security that if they follow their rules, they'll get protected and rewarded. If anything, they shield people from having to examine their own values, question them, and come to their own conclusions about what is right and wrong. I think of a sequence in the film Jesus Camp, in which a fundamentalist minister was explicitly telling his congregation that they didn't have to think or make decisions, just do what the Bible said. I can't think of a clearer example of that "leave the driving to us" factor. That minister achieved a certain degree of fame after the film Jesus Camp came out, but not for his part in the film - his name is Ted Haggard.

Sometimes people succeed in finding contact with the spiritual in religions, but the institutions themselves seem to follow the same laws of organizational behavior as any other human groups like corporations or governments - they become self-serving and put maintaining and increasing their power ahead of their original aim.

Good answer, James.

During the Obama campaign, when Rev. Wright became such an issue, it seemed as though many thought that a congregate must believe what their pastor says. I don't accept what I hear from a minister, just because it was in the sermon, but some friends assured me that many do. If one accepts what they are told without questioning, that is real faith I suppose, but it's a faith I question.

I now know Obama well enough to know that he will listen to anyone and question everything.

I was born and raised in a hindu family in slums of Bombay, India. I went to a school that was next to a mosque. Every moring and noon there were huge speakers few feet away from our wet and dungy class room that blasted "prayers". What little teaching was there had to be stopped as it was not possible to anything as soud was so loud and disturbing.

I have lived through so many religiously motivated clahes and one my childhood friend was killed in name of god.

I can't tell you how much I appreciate being in a country that lets me and my children live in enironement where no one brand of god is forced down our throat or ears.

Founding fathers were incredebily insightful when it came to religion. Happy to be the part of this society with all its warts.

You are so right, Hiten. We often forget that our Founding Fathers created the separation between church and state, because since 1980, religion has slowly but surely been integrated into our political process. It's also, in my opinion, what some conservatives use in its designation of others as "American" or "Un-American" or "Patriotic" or "Un-Patriotic".

What has concerned me over the last 8 years is that people who criticize the government are also labeled as "Anti-American". Free speech includes the right to hate and it includes the right to criticize our government. Thus, calling these folks "Un-American" becomes a way to curtail freedom of speech, which is much scarier, in my opinion, than someone who wants to give a tax break to the middle class.

I think that there is a schism developing within the Republic Party between those who are stuck in the past and those who want to broaden the party to include more points of view and to create a broader definition of conservativism. It will be interesting to see where the party ends up within the next 2-4 years. I think that this country is poised for some major policital changes within that party as well as under the leadership of Obama. Obama is the right person at the right time for the leadership position in our government. My feeling is that he will accomplish great things and that he will go down not only as the first African-American President, but also as one of the best Presidents ever in history.

It is never unpatriotic to think independently, ask questions, and if the emperor appears to be naked to say so loudly.

The idea that good citizenship equals lockstep obedience is a recipe for totalitarianism, not for a free society... the people who try to stifle dissent or questions are the unpatriotic ones.

The people in our government always need to remember that they work for us.

As for religion, it never seems to occur to the people who want to establish official or favored faiths that their own version of belief may one day the minority whose freedom of worship might be at risk if that precedent is set for any denomination. Instead of being grateful that they're allowed to worship as they choose, they take it as an imposition on them if anyone else is allowed to exercise the same freedom in a different way. It's a simple question of the Golden Rule.

Re Obama's election, one of the most encouraging anecdotes I've heard - I forget the sources - was a blog entry by a woman who described how she was moved to tears of joy - when she tried to convey to her grade-school age child what had just happened, the child was confused - she told her mom she didn't understand what the big deal is, because what difference does it make what race he is?

If only we were at that level as a society!

Hiten, I've seen the slums of Bombay. I've seen death and destruction over religious differences that make our sturggles in America seem like nothing...ex. Beirut. I've learned much from my studies of many religions, Hindu is one of them. I'm always amazed at what people find in religion to justify wars and opression.

Sera, un-Americans are rampant, it seems. It makes me sick to my stomach to listen to the "real Americans" and "un-American" rhetoric, recently.

James, I'll go even further. It is our duty as Americans to criticize when we disagree with our leaders. I support Obama with everything inside me, and still am already critical of some of his positions. I never expected to agree with everything he will do. It never even occurred to me that we wouldn't disagree. But that doesn't mean I dislike him, or disrespect him.

I do expect to see a lot of changes in the Republican party; which way they swing will be interesting to watch. Will they become more tolerant of people's differences? Or, will they dig even deeper into cultural and religious positions to divide and conquer society. Gay marriage? Abortion? Guns? God? Wars? Tax cuts for the wealthiest, anyone?

Same here re Obama - at this point there are three areas where I have serious heartburn with his actions to date: that deeply flawed bailout bill, his cosigning on giving the telecomms retroactive immunity for violating the law and our Constitutional rights by spying on our emails and phone calls, and his history of advocating severe restrictions on the Second Amendment rights of even responsible gun owners who are scrupulous about safety and obeying the laws.

As for the Republicans, I've seen some speculation by columnists and others who consider themselves moderate Republicans and fear that the far-right fundamentalists who've had a death grip on their party's steering wheel for over a decade now will keep that control and will push the Republican part even farther to the right. (A blog post in which I wrote on this at more length: http://www.teambio.org/2008/11/11/the... ) Given the changing demographics and views of the American electorate - there is a direct correlation among age, religiosity, homophobia, and other forms of bigotry, which means that their base is eroding daily, dying off faster than it acquires new adherents (of course there are many exceptions, both progressive older people and extremist young ones - that equates to that party becoming increasingly irrelevant.

The alternative would be for the moderate wing - fiscally conservative and socially somewhat progressive, in other words the opposite of the current leadership - to somehow wrestle control out of the hands of the far right and move the Republican party back toward the center, which would make it possible for them to attract more voters and make the Democrats work to keep their majority in the Congress.

If that doesn't happen, we might see another party move up to fill the vacuum created by the need for a mainstream opposition party to the Democrats. One that's growing fast is the Modern Whig party.

I would suggest that the Founding Fathers wanted to create a separation (no federal support for or against) between religion and the frederal government, no the states. Example - Congress shall make no law...
As for "Free speech includes the right to hate..." I agree to a point. Having the privilege of working with returing military vets, some who were assigned as Honor Guards at funerals where anti-war protested demonstrated outside the churches of our fallen heros, I personally do not see this as a form of patriotism.

James, do tell about the Modern Whig party. I consider myself well-informed, but you got me on this one. I'm also going to see what I can find on-line.

Andy, the KKK is about as anti-American (if one seeks to use patriotism as some type of standard, which I do not) as a group can get, but their members have been allowed to preach their vitriol for decades and decades. The KKK has this right, because the right of freedom of speech is not based on subjective notions of what should or should not be allowed (except for when it involves issues of safety). Once we decide what peopel can or cannot say, then we have begun to regulate speech. I don't like it either, but without the allowance, we will begin to erode this right until there is very little left to it.

Sera, I think we agree in opposing the KKK and anti-war protestors who demonstrate outside of funerals for fallen military heros. I am fully aware of both groups Constitution rights, in fact the blood and sacrifice of soldiers helped and are helping guarantee those rights. I, as a citizen not a representative of the government, just don't see this type of anti-war protesting as very patriotic (my right). Others might, and argue that the protestors are suppoting the troops but opposing the war. I don't.

Andy,

You are right that we agree; as I said, I don't like it either.