Why bother registering as an independant? You're towing the GOP line like an old pro.

If only Democrats had more "uniters" like Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly, and Ann Coulter, they'd quit being so gosh darn divisive.

They probably only got Obama nominated to infuriate the predominantly white conservatives. Those rabble-rousers!


He doesn't cry racism.

At least he doesn't yell "Cracker a$$ cracker!" at McCain supporters.


Your aorta depends on it.


No, he's your nightmare.

How so? I believe that Reagan was not divisive, nor was Clinton. But ever since O'Reilly's book, and the Gingrich congress, I see more and more Republicans going for the "us against them" tactics than the other way around. I think Rove/Bush were the kings of the strategy, and McCain/Palin are going for the same. I wonder how you see it differently.

AGG

Because "Mr. Independent" doesn't like them.

A more HONEST and INTERESTING question would be why is Obama lying about his involvement w/ ACORN?

Obama's campaign website states:

Fact: Barack was never an ACORN trainer and never worked for ACORN in any other capacity.

LINK

Hey, Krazy, if the Democrats think what comes out of Teddy's mouth is so good that he needed to be at Obama's convention to "say a few words," who are the Republicans to disagree with the them?

After all, he IS the same pre-brain tumor Teddy who found a way to drive into a creek, kill a woman, disappear and claim it "wasn't really him."

The same pre-brain tumor Teddy who got so wound up in his speech he coined the words "Osama Obama." Same old Teddy.

Same old tolerance of the Democrat party for the shyster activities of it's politicians....and Barak's are just the latest in a long history of Democrat double-speak and feigned "outrage" over the "wrongdoings" of politicians....if they happen to be Democrat and not Republican wrongdoers.

But Barak "walks on water" for you, Krazy. That is obvious.

So please stop asking McCain supporters to admit to any areas of disagreement with McCain when you can't see OBVIOUS serious flaws in Obama and defend Obamessiah with such religious fervor.

There is absolutely no reason for any McCain supporter to "be reasonable" by your request when you are are totally unreasonable concerning any "questionable" areas regarding Barak Obama.

Probably for the same reason he steadfastly refuses to release anything to with his time in the various colleges he attended.

He has something to hide.

But ACORN he can't hide, and it is beginning to show the "Alinsky" training, the socialist agenda, the strong-arm tactics, and the outright LIES of Obama when he "gets caught" and to lie his way out of it so people can't see the REAL Obama beneath the campaign rhetoric.

Still waiting for an explanation from FH on how the Iraq war curbed Militant Islam...

AGG

FH and others...

Any of you actually know what ACORN is first-hand?

LA

Good grief...stop with the religious stuff already, would ya? lol

Maybe they were from Rensselaer County

AGG - who said anything about "curbing" Militant Islam?

Confronting it, yes.

Fighting it and killing members of it, yes.

Helping the Iraqi government to become a stable democracy in the Middle East, yes.

Per the "benchmarks" that the Libs wanted, Iraq continues to be a very big success story, but they still won't admit it.

Per Osama, et. al, Iraq was/is central to their efforts to extend radical Islam.

Per Obama, let's just invade Pakistan without their approval or assistance to try to get Osama.

VERY diplomatic of him. Sort of falls in line with his idea of "negotiating without any preconditions" if you think about it.

By the way, when was the last Al Qaeda attack on the USA?

Why?

Zealous support and defense of Obama with NO concern for what he HAS said and done seems to fit the description of most Obama supporters as they "swoon" under his "messiahship."

That's just how it looks from your extraordinarily biased point-of-view. You are parroting a McCain ad aimed at evangelists where he stops just short of saying that Obama just might literally be the Antichrist.

If Obama supporters are "swooning" under his "messiahship", what are McCain supporters doing when they are motivated to kill someone after hearing a McCain or Palin speech?

Here is an intersting op-ed piece.

It's from the New York Times, but some of you might find it interesting anyway.

Keep in mind it's an op-ed piece, not a declaration of fact.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/10/o...ion&pagewanted=print&oref=slogin

Fine, I'll play the word game. How exactly has the Iraq war confronted (rather than increased) Militant Islam?

Please be sure to include more than just "we killed a bunch of people who tried to fight against us in Iraq".

Include the consideration of Iran becoming an unchallenged Militant Islam powerhouse in the vacuum created by us by obliterating its biggest counterforce (Iraq).

Include the consideration of nuclear Pakistan becoming more radicalized over the past few years, with car bombings routine now.

Do you believe that the Iraq war has decreased or increased the number of Muslims in the world who now hate the US? Or is your answer that there is no downside to increasing this number, we'll just go kill them all?

History will show the Iraq war to be a complete blunder. Your arguments (and McCain's) are all about how to make the best of this blunder, but do not address that the blunder could have been avoided to begin with, as Obama has argued.

The world stood with us on 9/11, and after we went to Afghanistan to pursue the terrorist. The minute we lost that focus, and decided to embark on Dubya's personal vendetta, we lost the world's support and created more anti-Americanism than we can ever kill.

AGG

Iraq is a HUGE blunder.

But you lose all credibility with a statement like this. Dems and Reps all saw the same intelligence and ALL decided that action was the best thing.

Obama had NOTHING at stake by offering his opinion. He did NOT see the information that others saw.

I'm glad we agree. But I am still waiting to hear McCain or FH admit this. McCain is only focusing on the tactical questions of how to fight the war, but does not touch on the strategic blunder of the war, forgetting that he was one of the biggest cheerleaders, promising us a swift victory and liberator greetings. Wrong. As for FH, he keeps teaching me misguided lessons about the Germans and Pearl Harbor, but cannot give any support for this war other than overused cliches. I have lived for years behind the Iron Curtain, in the Middle East, (and even in Philly ), so I need more than just cliches spoken by folks who learned about how the world works by seeing it on TV.


Perhaps in your eyes, and that is fine. But, first of all, I would have to be naive and not cynical (and I am neither) to believe that no intelligence that did not support the argument for war was suppressed (why did Plame get outed in the midst of the discussion??).

Second, let's not forget that Bush wanted to get rid of Hussein before 9/11 ever happened. So let's not confuse his motives with whatever WMD intelligence he mustered up - his motives were not based on the intelligence, they were a personal vendetta, which is something he never hid.

But even that aside, let's see - McCain was the war's prime cheerleader; Obama opposed it. Given that the war was a total blunder, why would I not give the edge to the guy who opposed it?


Right. So he reached the right conclusion, whereas McCain reached the wrong conclusion. Obama has the better judgment, IMO.

Just like abortion is issue 1 to you (which I respect), issue 1 to me is someone who can avoid needless wars and bloodshed. McCain has not shown me that he can.

AGG

read my statement again. Obama did NOT see the information.

On a different note...IF the panels report on Palin is in fact correct, she should be removed from the ticket. As there are some that feel this is s political issue, I will wait to read the report before offering a final opinion.

I will not tolerate a lack of character on either side.

Recent CNN Report: CNN