Go on.

article.  but if in fact that's what was said by sebelius - its a huge STRECH, offensive and not going to work.

Won't it be a great day in American when it's unremarkable a biracial man is the nominee of a major party

I'll agree with that...but would amend it to:
'Won't it be a great day in America when it's unremarkable that a woman or a biracial man is the nominee of a major party'.

Hear no evil, say no evil, speak no evil.  This is the mantra that must be recited when discussing our presumptive candidate.

Governor Sibelius has laid down the gauntlet and served notice on everyone who might be a tad concerned about Obama's rather thin resumé.  

I'm having a flashback to the days after 9-11 when Ari Fleischer said "Watch what you say....".

Here's what the actual paper reported (rather than the editorial that catfish2 linked to).

"That has been the Republican playbook for the last eight years," said Sebelius, an Obama ally. " 'He's not qualified, he's somebody who should scare you. He's too liberaI.' "

The Kansas Democrat, often mentioned as a possible running mate for Obama, said those were all "code words" to try to make voters "uncomfortable."

"I don't think anybody's going to go directly at the race issue, but that's going to be an underlying theme," she said in an interview this week.

Note the editing.  The reader cannot discern whether Sebelius herself connected the "code words" comment to the "race issue".

And Obama himself simply noted that race would be an issue, as he anticipated GOP attacks.

I remember when Hillary backers thought that the ability to anticipate and pre-emptively address GOP attacks was an asset, not a liability.

call someone racist - - the more post racial / post partisan he presents himself, the better he does.  Isn't that the lesson of January to June, with everyone's varied ups and downs?

when he accused Kerry of using the "age" card when Kerry called him "confused."  You might as well gin up the victimhood card if the other side is playing it as well, though it's something that I discourage.

Part of the Republican branding of Barack Obama is going to be an attempt to paint him as the "Affirmative Action candidate" - an underqualified black man who beats out more qualified white people for the job because of well-meaning liberals.  The inexperience theme, I think, is definitely going to have that undertone to it.

The Republicans are going to try to make Barack Obama into the black kid with a middling GPA who got into the college your straight-A son or daughter got rejected from, or the black guy who got the promotion because the board of directors wanted diversity in management.  (I'm not saying that either of these things are true, mind you, just that that's going to be a dominant subconscious theme of the Republican branding.)  Given this, the theme of inexperience - of saying that he's not qualified for the job, and that if he takes the job from McCain it's going to just be another quota in action - is definitely going to be racially coded, even if not explicitly stated as such.

They'll let Limbaugh, Hannity, et al. push the envelope by overtly linking Obama to affirmative action (as I believe they already have), and then use the code-words - which have plausible deniability against accusations of racism - when they want to rile up some white folks against Obama.

This is an editorial that weaves together a series of quotes in order to support the editorialist's viewpoint.  Shouldn't the original story stand on its merits?  The editorialist synthesizes facts to present an opinion, you present the opinion as fact.

1) Can anyone look back on the job that Barack Obama has done in the United States Senate, and honestly say, "Well Done"?

2) Can anyone name a significant accomplishment that the Senator can claim during his time in the US Senate?

When I have raised these questions with friends and political associates, they--like Mrs. Sebelius--have suggested that my motives were racist. When in fact, all I am saying is that I feel that Sen.Obama has a very thin resume for one aspiring to the Presidency. And that his qualifications are less than impressive.

nuff of this racebaiting.. calling a person with 173 days of "experience" as inexperienced isnt racist.. geez w/e call me racist and I will show what real racism is.. here is an example..

I am of mixed color, and AA is not one of those colors. recently I went to pizza hut.. an AA server took care of us.. treated us like dirt.. gave us an undercooked pizza and when we protested.. she told us that was the way pizzas are made in america..

the irony was she was calling the lady on the next table maam.. offering her excellent customer service.. apologized for an undercooked pizza and told that she will replace the pizza.. and repeatedly treated her with utmost respect.. and guess what.. she was an african american lady..

now dat to me is racism.. dont overload the term racism when people equate a thin resume to inexperience.. obama is indeed less on experience compared to mccain.. however, he is more right than wrong compared to mccain on issues important to me and thats why I support him.. not because he is experienced! get a grip.. dont call people racist.. when the real racists are selling buttons making "whitehouse" jokes in texas, you accuse ordinary folks of being racist..

Stripped of the journalistic interpretation, this is what the paper actually quotes Sebelius as saying:

"a major effort to try and frighten people about him"

"That has been the Republican playbook for the last eight years. He's not qualified, he's somebody who should scare you. He's too liberal."

"code words"

"uncomfortable"

"I don't think anybody's going to go directly at the race issue, but that's going to be an underlying theme."

Always, always judge someone's words based on their words, not a reporter's paraphrase.