I will employ my own solution, i.e. I will ignore those who discuss the topic using terms like that.
But for reference, it would be nice to know why derogatory terminology is acceptable but a response to it is not..

We have a comments policy below that you might want to review before you click the “Submit Comment” button. Please stick to the topic and avoid attacks on our bloggers or each other.

I made the mistake of beginning to feel bad about ignoring you for so long. I seldom make the same mistake twice.

degrades debate

I am not obliged to be kind toward degenerate and dishonest behavior and statements. (I also am not reluctant to engage in spirited defense.) I am quite kind in that I let most idiocy I see slip by these days without comment (admonition).

yes, but the legacy is still at work as is racism.
Having token figure heads like Colin Power does not come anywhere near assessing the situration a it is for average people.

Since I disagree with you, then by your standars, I’m at liberty to back up my own ‘facts’ with a few juicy insults of my own.

I choose not to do that, because it degrades debate.
That is the point you continually miss.

This nation is not systematically racist, it is hardly the same as it was sixty years ago, and there is no normality in the desire to vote for a minority (or for a woman) for President simply for that reason, much less that such a choice is “necessary” [sic].

Legions of us were ready to make Colin Powell our next President after the elder Bush, and we’d vote for him today if he were to run. It is based on merit, not on political correctness and reverse racism.

Obama vs Richardson because it’s black vs Latino?

Yes — reverse racism, PC and quota craziness.

Anybody who thinks things haven’t changed since 1947 is crazy or in a state of arrested, not merely retarded, development. Crazy is the most likely exxplanation if the desire for PC Presidential selection is visceral in nature.

Why not simply write the quotas into the Constitution? Men and women would alternate each term in the Presidency, and a list of minorities would drawn up and set with whites in a sequence or rotation order for each term, because random selection would be seen as unfair to minorities if a white candidate was chosen and equality would be needed to boost the presence of minorities above their actual fraction or proportion of the American population.

The foregoing is not a serious proposal because it is unmerited and is downright wrong, but it is where the reverse-racist craziness points. *sigh*

This isn’t to say that Richardson won’t be able to turn out the Latino vote here — or even that he might not have a salutary effect on our relationships with Latin America, but I don’t think he’s the same visceral proof of America’s diversity as Obama is.

I shrink from that manner of thinking.
Should Hillary be the favorite just because she would represent women, a sizable proportion of the population not previously represented in the executive?

Looking at the substance under the pirctures of these people should still matter.

From the interviews I’ve seen, of Obama, he is the one who has the presence of a statesman rather than a politician.
That matters a whole lot, when it comes to regaining our status on the international scene.
In turn, our status internationally matters when it comes to resolving many of our internal conflicts.

That statesmanlike persona would be welcome at the President’s podium for any number of internal reasons, as well. It might inspire some of us to rise to his example as we debate everything under the sun.

So if your purpose is to somehow mend race relations and promote the diversity of America around the world, Obama is not the only choice. In my opinion, Richardson is the better option.