I really didn’t think you had it in you. The nomination for the presidency of a black man with a Muslim-sounding name is an absolutely amazing feat for your Christian-fearing masses to have accomplished.
Frankly I’m astounded. I’m astounded and very proud of the fact that, in 2008, you could look beyond the stereotypical facade of the past and nominate someone based on actual principles and performance, rather than money, stature and race.
Well done. Very well done.
I hope Mr. Obama continues on to the White House. The American dream is alive and well.
Thanks. We know that you mean well. But we’ve been trying to tell you that you guys have the wrong impression of us anyway. We are not “Christian-fearing masses.” A lot of us are Christians, but that does not equate to being dogmatic lunatics.
People of many races and cultures here are celebrating the historic importance of this week. Glad you can catch the joy!
I have heard that Obama will give his acceptance speech at the Democratic Convention on the 45th Anniversary of Dr. Martin Luther King’s I Have A Dream speech. How cool is that?
If he actually tries to renegotiate NAFTA, it’ll be bad for both countries. Canada, despite being a small neighbor, is still its own country and isn’t going to renegotiate a treaty to its detriment and get nothing in return, any renegotiation is just going to lead to greater trade barriers which in the long run isn’t to the benefit of either country–unfortunately the politicians on either side won’t think so.
Both of the Dem candidates stance on free trade is the only thing I can really get riled up over this election cycle. It’s not that I don’t care about Iraq, taxation, and a few other big issues–it’s just that I’m old and numb to a lot of things now. I’ve lived through so many different shifts in the tax code, and it always feels like I’m giving up around the same pound of flesh every year anyways regardless of the actual amount, that it’s not going to ruin my life if a small portion of my income is taxed at a higher rate than before.
You could argue that the ability to raise the money reflects critical organizational and political acumen.
(Rather than perpetually writing checks from your own account to advance a loans to your own campaign. In Hillary’s case, being rich in her own right didn’t help much, did it?)
Thank you for your kind words of encouragement. As you know, our Congress recently decided to hold debates on the great issue of whether the world is actually round as the heathens claim, or a flat plane around which the sun orbits (with the United States at the center, of course.) As the great people of Canada have just recently discovered how to convert polar bear meat directly into igloos, we would appreciate the contributions of your great sages to this bold endeavor.
Then it also should be “I wonder what the OP’s post will be …”
However, apart from nitpicking, if Senators Obama and McCain are the two main candidates in the real election, then each has a non-zero chance of winning. However, given how well Senator Obama did in the primaries, and given the general unpopularity of the GOP at present, I suspect that the Senator from Illinois has a better chance of winning.
Regardless of how impressed someone from Canada is, more people voted for candidates other than Obama. Also, Didn’t Hillary win the popular vote? Ironically for Dems, Florida is part of the voting shananigans again that leave doubt as to the actual winner.
That, however, leaves out states that use caucuses. Considering Sen. Clinton’s furor over the “disenfranchisement” of voters in Michigan and Florida (because they broke the rules set out by her own party’s committee) I find it interesting that she’s so eager to ignore the states that use caucus voting.
