The racism card is the red herring shied Obama's defenders use to deflect any criticism about Obama.
You want to know where Obama is coming from and what sort of "change you can believe in" is headed your way, I'd suggest looking at his actual record.
http://www.govote.com/Senate/Barack_Obama.htmFor me there's a lot not to like; things that have absolutely nothing to do with the color of his skin.
His determination to significantly raise income taxes is unacceptable to me.
His stance on education is unacceptable to me; I always wonder about legislators that send their kids to exclusive private schools but are against the voucher system.
His intention to meet with clowns like Chavez does not meet my expectations in the foreign policy area.
I find his commentary on government reform laughable from a person that is in league with Tony Resko.
His ignorant commentary on gun control is unacceptable. "Ban semiautomatics"; he doesn't have a clue.
I don't agree with his "path to citizenship" approach to the immigration problem.
I don't see any positive change I can believe in. I see a lot of negative change that I believe he will try to implement.
But, of course, since it's hard to counter those points, I'll soon be accused of racism.
Ripsnort's sig line should be modified for the election period. It now says "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who is winning an argument with a liberal." But during this election it should say "The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who won't vote for Obama."
But what do I know; I'm probably just a typical white man. <- That isn't a racist remark. This would be a racist remark: "Joe Shmoe is just a typical black man." See the difference?