White House race is a close call

[nageov3t]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
If it was Hillary he was running against I'm sure that old Crank McSame would be leading in the polls.

correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't an Obama/Hillary pair-up the only thing that pushes Barack above 50% in the polls?

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: loki8481

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
If it was Hillary he was running against I'm sure that old Crank McSame would be leading in the polls.

correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't an Obama/Hillary pair-up the only thing that pushes Barack above 50% in the polls?

That would bring the pissed off Clinton supporters like you and Lupi on board.

 

[lupi]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: loki8481

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
If it was Hillary he was running against I'm sure that old Crank McSame would be leading in the polls.

correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't an Obama/Hillary pair-up the only thing that pushes Barack above 50% in the polls?

That would bring the pissed off Clinton supporters like you and Lupi on board.

Neine. VP is 95% irrelevant and unless some photogs snap a couple shots of BHO in a clothing optional hot tube with a couple blondes, there is way too much hate on both sides for that to work.

 

[nageov3t]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: loki8481

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
If it was Hillary he was running against I'm sure that old Crank McSame would be leading in the polls.

correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't an Obama/Hillary pair-up the only thing that pushes Barack above 50% in the polls?

That would bring the pissed off Clinton supporters like you and Lupi on board.

nah. Clinton as VP would make me less likely to vote for Obama and would make me like Hillary a lot less.

 

[SparkyJJO]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Genx87
My problem with the excessive oil profits mantra is what is deemed excessive?

Is it going to be a norm that we tax corporations for good performance?

When it impacts the country negatively, yes.

Hello??? They won't eat the cost. They'll pass it on to us. To YOU.

ADDING A COST DOES NOT LOWER ANY PRICES. Increase cost on one end = increased cost on the other end. Seriously, is this really that hard of a concept to understand for some people? Taxes don't fix all problems!

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: SparkyJJO

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Genx87
My problem with the excessive oil profits mantra is what is deemed excessive?

Is it going to be a norm that we tax corporations for good performance?

When it impacts the country negatively, yes.

Hello??? They won't eat the cost. They'll pass it on to us. To YOU.

ADDING A COST DOES NOT LOWER ANY PRICES. Increase cost on one end = increased cost on the other end. Seriously, is this really that hard of a concept to understand for some people? Taxes don't fix all problems!

This point has already been addressed. Additional costs to the producer do not always get passed on to the consumer, a lot of it depends on how much profit they are making to begin with, etc.

As has been said before, if this were the case it would never do anything to tax any business ever, and that is obviously false. So yes, your concept is difficult to understand because it's wrong.

 

[fb0252]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: fb0252
I'm surprised to read so little in this thread about the race thing. Seems to me Obama's selection automatically makes race the issue and all this liberal/conservative stuff merely jibberish for this election. Is there any doubt if Obama is elected that in the next 8 years we'll be importing another 10 million Africans, the earned income tax credit will continue exploding the minority population, and for whitey, that(and more) will spell the end of the country. Seems to me those young, (white) Obama "supporters" will wake up to the real issue here sometime before they step into the voting booth. The Blacks to their credit already have. Amazing to me being an old fart that you even have to spell it out. If I'm right, that makes this election for both Whites and Blacks pivot on which racial groups are going to control the country. That's the debate here regardless of what degree of buffoonrey you want to attribute to the Republicans.

Is this a serious post? Or is it normal for you to spout KKK talking points?

yes, it's a serious post. the fact that you confuse the "points" in the post with the KKK is blowing smoke. the issue here is whether (white) America wants a black president. if you do, that is your perogative.

 

[SparkyJJO]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: SparkyJJO

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Genx87
My problem with the excessive oil profits mantra is what is deemed excessive?

Is it going to be a norm that we tax corporations for good performance?

When it impacts the country negatively, yes.

Hello??? They won't eat the cost. They'll pass it on to us. To YOU.

ADDING A COST DOES NOT LOWER ANY PRICES. Increase cost on one end = increased cost on the other end. Seriously, is this really that hard of a concept to understand for some people? Taxes don't fix all problems!

This point has already been addressed. Additional costs to the producer do not always get passed on to the consumer, a lot of it depends on how much profit they are making to begin with, etc.

As has been said before, if this were the case it would never do anything to tax any business ever, and that is obviously false. So yes, your concept is difficult to understand because it's wrong.

Did I say, never tax a business? No. You are taking what I said and blowing it out of proportion. Don't do that.

Taxing them MORE will not lower prices. Since when does taxing a company lower the cost of their product?

And I'm sorry but I didn't read all 8 pages of this thread.

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: eskimospy
-snip-
This point has already been addressed. Additional costs to the producer do not always get passed on to the consumer, a lot of it depends on how much profit they are making to begin with, etc.

And that point has been addressed.

It has already been noted that their profit margins are lower when compared to prior years before the increase in oil prices.

Looking at their amount of profit in the aggregate raw number is incorrect. One needs to look at their EPS and ROI. They don't have fat margins, it's not unreasonable to expect that they will have to pass along some, or all, of this mis-named Windfall Profits Tax.

Their share price is now about $76 (monthly average) compared with a high of about $93 (monthly ave).

IMO, it'll drop again if the WFP tax is passed, the only way to get it back up is to increase EPS (I.e., pass the tax onto consumers). Why should those investors (individuals, mutual funds and retirement plans) take it in the shorts for eveyone else?

Fern

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: fb0252

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: fb0252
I'm surprised to read so little in this thread about the race thing. Seems to me Obama's selection automatically makes race the issue and all this liberal/conservative stuff merely jibberish for this election. Is there any doubt if Obama is elected that in the next 8 years we'll be importing another 10 million Africans, the earned income tax credit will continue exploding the minority population, and for whitey, that(and more) will spell the end of the country. Seems to me those young, (white) Obama "supporters" will wake up to the real issue here sometime before they step into the voting booth. The Blacks to their credit already have. Amazing to me being an old fart that you even have to spell it out. If I'm right, that makes this election for both Whites and Blacks pivot on which racial groups are going to control the country. That's the debate here regardless of what degree of buffoonrey you want to attribute to the Republicans.

Is this a serious post? Or is it normal for you to spout KKK talking points?

yes, it's a serious post. the fact that you confuse the "points" in the post with the KKK is blowing smoke. the issue here is whether (white) America wants a black president. if you do, that is your perogative.

And your opinion CLEARLY is that white American should NOT want a black President because -- in your paranoid and logically unsupported opinion -- he will do his damnedest to make sure poor 'whitey' gets wiped out.

Is that 'blowing smoke,' old man?

You know what I don't like about your cowardly paranoid ilk, old man? It's that many in your generation never could come to grips with the fact that these non-whites here in our country (legally, of course) are Americans too. They're entitled to the same rights and privileges under our sacred Constitution and its Bill of Rights as whites.
Luckily, the youth of America don't see it your way for the most part (as you noted). They understand what many in your generation couldn't, that 'liberty and justice for all' means EVERYBODY.

Thankfully, your generation won't be with us much longer.

edit: Oh, and I'm proud right now to say that my 75 year-old father is a staunch Obama supporter.

 

[RY62]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: fb0252

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: fb0252
I'm surprised to read so little in this thread about the race thing. Seems to me Obama's selection automatically makes race the issue and all this liberal/conservative stuff merely jibberish for this election. Is there any doubt if Obama is elected that in the next 8 years we'll be importing another 10 million Africans, the earned income tax credit will continue exploding the minority population, and for whitey, that(and more) will spell the end of the country. Seems to me those young, (white) Obama "supporters" will wake up to the real issue here sometime before they step into the voting booth. The Blacks to their credit already have. Amazing to me being an old fart that you even have to spell it out. If I'm right, that makes this election for both Whites and Blacks pivot on which racial groups are going to control the country. That's the debate here regardless of what degree of buffoonrey you want to attribute to the Republicans.

Is this a serious post? Or is it normal for you to spout KKK talking points?

yes, it's a serious post. the fact that you confuse the "points" in the post with the KKK is blowing smoke. the issue here is whether (white) America wants a black president. if you do, that is your perogative.

And your opinion CLEARLY is that white American should NOT want a black President because -- in your paranoid and logically unsupported opinion -- he will do his damnedest to make sure poor 'whitey' gets wiped out.

Is that 'blowing smoke,' old man?

You know what I don't like about your cowardly paranoid ilk, old man? It's that many in your generation never could come to grips with the fact that these non-whites here in our country (legally, of course) are Americans too. They're entitled to the same rights and privileges under our sacred Constitution and its Bill of Rights as whites.
Luckily, the youth of America don't see it your way for the most part (as you noted). They understand what many in your generation couldn't, that 'liberty and justice for all' means EVERYBODY.

Thankfully, your generation won't be with us much longer.

edit: Oh, and I'm proud right now to say that my 75 year-old father is a staunch Obama supporter.

Sexism, racism, ageism, homophobia, etc...what makes any one more acceptable than the other?

Let me be clear, I don't agree with the comments of fb0252 but, I find your comments disgusting. Your wishing an entire generation gone, the attacks against McCains age (Methusalah) and against Senator Clinton's gender (psycho bitch) are no different than a racist comment against Obama.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: RY62

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: fb0252

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: fb0252
I'm surprised to read so little in this thread about the race thing. Seems to me Obama's selection automatically makes race the issue and all this liberal/conservative stuff merely jibberish for this election. Is there any doubt if Obama is elected that in the next 8 years we'll be importing another 10 million Africans, the earned income tax credit will continue exploding the minority population, and for whitey, that(and more) will spell the end of the country. Seems to me those young, (white) Obama "supporters" will wake up to the real issue here sometime before they step into the voting booth. The Blacks to their credit already have. Amazing to me being an old fart that you even have to spell it out. If I'm right, that makes this election for both Whites and Blacks pivot on which racial groups are going to control the country. That's the debate here regardless of what degree of buffoonrey you want to attribute to the Republicans.

Is this a serious post? Or is it normal for you to spout KKK talking points?

yes, it's a serious post. the fact that you confuse the "points" in the post with the KKK is blowing smoke. the issue here is whether (white) America wants a black president. if you do, that is your perogative.

And your opinion CLEARLY is that white American should NOT want a black President because -- in your paranoid and logically unsupported opinion -- he will do his damnedest to make sure poor 'whitey' gets wiped out.

Is that 'blowing smoke,' old man?

You know what I don't like about your cowardly paranoid ilk, old man? It's that many in your generation never could come to grips with the fact that these non-whites here in our country (legally, of course) are Americans too. They're entitled to the same rights and privileges under our sacred Constitution and its Bill of Rights as whites.
Luckily, the youth of America don't see it your way for the most part (as you noted). They understand what many in your generation couldn't, that 'liberty and justice for all' means EVERYBODY.

Thankfully, your generation won't be with us much longer.

edit: Oh, and I'm proud right now to say that my 75 year-old father is a staunch Obama supporter.

Sexism, racism, ageism, homophobia, etc...what makes any one more acceptable than the other?

Let me be clear, I don't agree with the comments of fb0252 but, I find your comments disgusting. Your wishing an entire generation gone, the attacks against McCains age (Methusalah) and against Senator Clinton's gender (psycho bitch) are no different than a racist comment against Obama.

Wow, aren't you reading things into my posts that aren't there... I wonder why, eh?

How about you read fb0252's and my posts over again and re-phrase. I didn't attack McCain's age and 'psycho bitch'... who knows where that came from...

 

[fb0252]

were I younger and a student of history I'd avoid presuming anybody over 30 is a "racist". read your books and you'll see it's us oldsters that made Obama possible. But, that's completely other than my point. Fact is we're all racists, white, black and purple to the extent we want to be with our own kind and be governed by our own kind. Blacks should be proud of their candidate. He's got it all over the Republican in a lot of different ways imo. But, the question here is whether Caucasian American is ready to cede their country once and for all to the present minorities. that seems a huge huge question to me and is lost in the liberal/conservative, republican/democatric debate.

 

[RY62]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: RY62
Sexism, racism, ageism, homophobia, etc...what makes any one more acceptable than the other?

Let me be clear, I don't agree with the comments of fb0252 but, I find your comments disgusting. Your wishing an entire generation gone, the attacks against McCains age (Methusalah) and against Senator Clinton's gender (psycho bitch) are no different than a racist comment against Obama.

Wow, aren't you reading things into my posts that aren't there... I wonder why, eh?

How about you read fb0252's and my posts over again and re-phrase. I didn't attack McCain's age and 'psycho bitch'... who knows where that came from...

You're not a complete idiot. You know which part of the post pertains to you. You attacked McCain's age, my age, and pretty much everyone in the generation you wished gone with the comment - "Thankfully, your generation won't be with us much longer".

The other examples have been recently posted by other users and I wanted to make the point to everyone that they are equally as unacceptable as racist comments or your ageist comment.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: fb0252
were I younger and a student of history I'd avoid presuming anybody over 30 is a "racist". read your books and you'll see it's us oldsters that made Obama possible. But, that's completely other than my point. Fact is we're all racists, white, black and purple to the extent we want to be with our own kind and be governed by our own kind. Blacks should be proud of their candidate. He's got it all over the Republican in a lot of different ways imo. But, the question here is whether Caucasian American is ready to cede their country once and for all to the present minorities. that seems a huge huge question to me and is lost in the liberal/conservative, republican/democatric debate.

Nonsense...

Originally posted by: RY62
You're not a complete idiot. You know which part of the post pertains to you. You attacked McCain's age, my age, and pretty much everyone in the generation you wished gone with the comment - "Thankfully, your generation won't be with us much longer".

The other examples have been recently posted by other users and I wanted to make the point to everyone that they are equally as unacceptable as racist comments or your ageist comment.

... and nonsense.

Racists flock together to hide their crimes behind phony and unsubstantiated claims of ageism and sexism... as though this forum weren't an written discussion with everything there for all to see.

Oh, and I'm 37 this Saturday.

Basically, if you want to stay on topic on the fact that fb0252 is a raging racist spouting KKK talking points here on these forums, go ahead. Otherwise, turning it back on me only shows just how little argument you 2 have.

 

[RY62]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: fb0252
were I younger and a student of history I'd avoid presuming anybody over 30 is a "racist". read your books and you'll see it's us oldsters that made Obama possible. But, that's completely other than my point. Fact is we're all racists, white, black and purple to the extent we want to be with our own kind and be governed by our own kind. Blacks should be proud of their candidate. He's got it all over the Republican in a lot of different ways imo. But, the question here is whether Caucasian American is ready to cede their country once and for all to the present minorities. that seems a huge huge question to me and is lost in the liberal/conservative, republican/democatric debate.

Nonsense...

Originally posted by: RY62
You're not a complete idiot. You know which part of the post pertains to you. You attacked McCain's age, my age, and pretty much everyone in the generation you wished gone with the comment - "Thankfully, your generation won't be with us much longer".

The other examples have been recently posted by other users and I wanted to make the point to everyone that they are equally as unacceptable as racist comments or your ageist comment.

... and nonsense.

Racists flock together to hide their crimes behind phony and unsubstantiated claims of ageism and sexism... as though this forum weren't an written discussion with everything there for all to see.

Oh, and I'm 37 this Saturday.

Basically, if you want to stay on topic on the fact that fb0252 is a raging racist spouting KKK talking points here on these forums, go ahead. Otherwise, turning it back on me only shows just how little argument you 2 have.

I'm not flocking together with anyone. His comments came of as racist and yours came off as ageist. In my opinion, both were equally wrong.

You were quick to point out his racism but you did it with comments like - "Is that 'blowing smoke,' old man?", "You know what I don't like about your cowardly paranoid ilk, old man?", and "Thankfully, your generation won't be with us much longer". I don't often agree with you but I know you're better than that. There's no need to invoke one form of bigotry against another.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: fb0252
I'm surprised to read so little in this thread about the race thing. Seems to me Obama's selection automatically makes race the issue and all this liberal/conservative stuff merely jibberish for this election. Is there any doubt if Obama is elected that in the next 8 years we'll be importing another 10 million Africans, the earned income tax credit will continue exploding the minority population, and for whitey, that(and more) will spell the end of the country. Seems to me those young, (white) Obama "supporters" will wake up to the real issue here sometime before they step into the voting booth. The Blacks to their credit already have. Amazing to me being an old fart that you even have to spell it out. If I'm right, that makes this election for both Whites and Blacks pivot on which racial groups are going to control the country. That's the debate here regardless of what degree of buffoonrey you want to attribute to the Republicans.

Originally posted by: fb0252
were I younger and a student of history I'd avoid presuming anybody over 30 is a "racist". read your books and you'll see it's us oldsters that made Obama possible. But, that's completely other than my point. Fact is we're all racists, white, black and purple to the extent we want to be with our own kind and be governed by our own kind. Blacks should be proud of their candidate. He's got it all over the Republican in a lot of different ways imo. But, the question here is whether Caucasian American is ready to cede their country once and for all to the present minorities. that seems a huge huge question to me and is lost in the liberal/conservative, republican/democatric debate.

He called himself an 'old fart,' RY62, in an obvious attempt to pretend that his age gave him the authority to be a racist.

Don't duh-vert the issue by playing stupid about what you're willing to defend.

 

[Chaotic42]

This may make me sound like a dick, but were my lasts posts so stupid as to be unworthy of address, or are there really no answers to my questions?

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Chaotic42
This may make me sound like a dick, but were my lasts posts so stupid as to be unworthy of address, or are there really no answers to my questions?

Is this it?

Originally posted by: Chaotic42
I'm a white southerner and I'd have no problem voting for a black man (or woman), but I just cannot vote for Obama. He's far, far too fiscally liberal for me, too inexperienced, and I just disagree with too much of what he has to say.

I'd like to see a fiscal conservative in office one day. Maybe 2012...

Fiscally liberal compared to what? Bush or McCain? I've studied the numbers, and Obama is a fiscal conservative in relative comparison.

This is BTW my issue #1.

Breaking it down simply, the ol' evil 'tax and spend' is also known as PAYGO. It has the benefit of being democratic, namely that the govt can only spend what it can demand from the people.
On the Republican side though, you get 'borrow and tax and spend.' This is like handing your 16 year-old daughter the platinum card and telling her to have fun at the mall. Or in serious terms, this policy gives the govt a blank check to keep spending beyond what the people consent to have it spend. Thus, Republican Presidents run higher deficits with lower GDP growth than Democratic Presidents since WWII, their fiscal conservativism being nothing more than propaganda.

 

[RY62]

Originally posted by: Vic
He called himself an 'old fart,' RY62, in an obvious attempt to pretend that his age gave him the authority to be a racist.

Don't duh-vert the issue by playing stupid about what you're willing to defend.

You're being stupid if you think I was defending anything. I clearly stated that you were both being bigots. I've said my piece and you can take from it what you wish.

I apologize for my part in side-tracking this thread.

 

[Chaotic42]

Originally posted by: Vic
Fiscally liberal compared to what?

Me.

Calling Bush a fiscal conservative is absurd, and McCain doesn't seem to be that conservative, though he does at least attempt to sound the part: Link. Whether he actually wants to balance the budget and if he actually will is of course anyone's guess. Obama appears to want to spend money in a way that I find fiscally unsound for the reasons that I've already addressed in the thread.

Unfortunately I can't find where either candidate actually lays out a plan that involves numbers. Everyone wants to "Help the Middle Class!" and "Tax high income earners!" without actually saying what that means.

I'm a single 26-year old male who just bought a house. If I have to pay more tax money to bail out people who make more than me, use loopholes to pay less in taxes, and bought a house they couldn't afford... I might just lose it.

I don't think either candidate will make things that much better, but given what I can find about the man's policies, I think that Obama will make things worse.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Chaotic42

Originally posted by: Vic
Fiscally liberal compared to what?

Me.

Calling Bush a fiscal conservative is absurd, and McCain doesn't seem to be that conservative, though he does at least attempt to sound the part: Link. Whether he actually wants to balance the budget and if he actually will is of course anyone's guess. Obama appears to want to spend money in a way that I find fiscally unsound for the reasons that I've already addressed in the thread.

Unfortunately I can't find where either candidate actually lays out a plan that involves numbers. Everyone wants to "Help the Middle Class!" and "Tax high income earners!" without actually saying what that means.

I'm a single 26-year old male who just bought a house. If I have to pay more tax money to bail out people who make more than me, use loopholes to pay less in taxes, and bought a house they couldn't afford... I might just lose it.

I don't think either candidate will make things that much better, but given what I can find about the man's policies, I think that Obama will make things worse.

There is no solution for you. Our govt already did what you fear under Bush. The bill for that is already on our 'credit card,' and right now we're just paying the minimum monthly while they're getting set to jack the rate on us.
At best, McCain is going to be forced to do a 'read my lips' on any tax policy. At worst, God help us, he'll dip into our credit that much further.
Sorry, this is just reality. Your elders had a big party and left you the bill. I could go into the deeper aspects of what happened and the thieving gerontocracy that already controls our country at the expense of the productive, hard-working youth like yourself, but then I might be accused of being 'ageist' again.

 

[HomerJS]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: OrByte
AND, just what is a "preemptive race card" exactly? Everyone knows that in reality, America has a race problem. Now if BHO tells us that some might vote against him because he looks different...if that registers in your head as some sort of "preemptive" race card or race-baiting...what I'd like to know from YOU is...just how does BHO address this issue of race factoring into an election?

It is called 'preemptive' because McCain and mainstream Republicans are scared out of their wits to even mention that Obama is black.

Find me a comment by one mainstream Republican that talks about Obama being black in a negative way.
Despite this Obama is out there with his "I'm different" speech trying to make people think that the Republicans are getting ready to lynch him.

Finally, Obama's race is most likely not going to make a difference. No Democrat is going to win any of the deep south states where Obama's race will be a major issue when it comes to voting.

How about an entire state of Republicans..at least the party

 

[Excelsior]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Chaotic42

Originally posted by: Vic
Fiscally liberal compared to what?

Me.

Calling Bush a fiscal conservative is absurd, and McCain doesn't seem to be that conservative, though he does at least attempt to sound the part: Link. Whether he actually wants to balance the budget and if he actually will is of course anyone's guess. Obama appears to want to spend money in a way that I find fiscally unsound for the reasons that I've already addressed in the thread.

Unfortunately I can't find where either candidate actually lays out a plan that involves numbers. Everyone wants to "Help the Middle Class!" and "Tax high income earners!" without actually saying what that means.

I'm a single 26-year old male who just bought a house. If I have to pay more tax money to bail out people who make more than me, use loopholes to pay less in taxes, and bought a house they couldn't afford... I might just lose it.

I don't think either candidate will make things that much better, but given what I can find about the man's policies, I think that Obama will make things worse.

There is no solution for you. Our govt already did what you fear under Bush. The bill for that is already on our 'credit card,' and right now we're just paying the minimum monthly while they're getting set to jack the rate on us.
At best, McCain is going to be forced to do a 'read my lips' on any tax policy. At worst, God help us, he'll dip into our credit that much further.
Sorry, this is just reality. Your elders had a big party and left you the bill. I could go into the deeper aspects of what happened and the thieving gerontocracy that already controls our country at the expense of the productive, hard-working youth like yourself, but then I might be accused of being 'ageist' again.

The more I look into it the more depressed I become.

 

[TechAZ]

Originally posted by: HomerJS

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: OrByte
AND, just what is a "preemptive race card" exactly? Everyone knows that in reality, America has a race problem. Now if BHO tells us that some might vote against him because he looks different...if that registers in your head as some sort of "preemptive" race card or race-baiting...what I'd like to know from YOU is...just how does BHO address this issue of race factoring into an election?

It is called 'preemptive' because McCain and mainstream Republicans are scared out of their wits to even mention that Obama is black.

Find me a comment by one mainstream Republican that talks about Obama being black in a negative way.
Despite this Obama is out there with his "I'm different" speech trying to make people think that the Republicans are getting ready to lynch him.

Finally, Obama's race is most likely not going to make a difference. No Democrat is going to win any of the deep south states where Obama's race will be a major issue when it comes to voting.

How about an entire state of Republicans..at least the party

That's what you show for proof? There is no proof of the RNC smearing skin color in there.

The article talks about a conservative talk show host emphasizing Obama's middle name and the Tennessee Republican Party distastefully showed a picture of Obama in Somalian garb. If anything you might be able to argue religion smear, but not race. After all, Obama's spiritual advisor, great friend, pastor for 15+ years gave a lifetime achievement award to that bigot Farrakhan. Having any connection to that guy at all is opening yourself up to questions about your true feelings towards Jewish people.

So, that's all you have? Obama is the one bringing up race all the time, maybe his handlers should keep him on a shorter leash.