Reply #256: We have seen this race card argument for Obama a lot since he lost on Tuedsay

[jackson_dem]

If we accept its premises that means Clinton should be Obama's veep since not doing so would be giving the finger to 155 million. She will either win the popular vote or lose it narrowly (if she wins it the same arguments about it being "stolen" can be made, as they can if Obama wins by excluding Fl and MI). Aren't her voters, especially women, entitled to her being on the ticket using the very premises of the Ferraroesque Obama should win because he is black?

What about Latinos? Does this mean Richardson or Salaazar should be on the ticket of Clinton is denied? Or if Clinton gets the veep spot because she deserves it on behalf of 155 million women who won't be affected at all whether she or John Smith is veep does that mean the #3 slot should go to a Latino? Richardson for Secretary of State? What about Asians? Gary Locke for Secretary of Defense, #4? Oh, and Native Americans. Isn't it about time they get their share of the pie? #5? Attorney General? White males would need something too. Secretary of Education? Let's move beyond ethnic groups. How about GLBT people? Barney Frank for Secretary of HHS? Muslims? They will vote heavily for us too. Keith Ellison for Secetary of Labor? Don't you see how ridiculous the road Obama is leading us on is?

It is ironic the man whose candidacy is based to a large part on his self-proclaimed ability to unite is dividing the party in the worst possible way to prevent a nomination he should have secured 41 states ago, or at least two months ago, from slipping away.