Right, senator. Let's stick to "straight talk" like how U.S. forces will be in Iraq for 100 years.

- Paul

Mc Cain is saying that it might be most prudent to keep American Military not as a fighting force, but in a small scale security mode for a long time. The U.S. Forces were in Germany for 60 years. And are still in Korea.

Skyhawk - Obama and McCain have identical positions on targeting bin Laden in Pakistan.

The kindergarten thing was pretty benign, and in fact my son's parochial school already has a program similar to the one proposed.

Obama is an empty suit that speaks. Maybe he never speaks of his 'ideas' on the campaign trail as he does not understand them. Is he a puppet?

I have multiple advanced degrees in economics and business and his economic plan is a complete disaster waiting to happen.

He says he can fund the huge spending increases by ending the war in Iraq - like it or not $150 billion a year is not a lot compared to a $3.3 Trillion budget.

Obama is delusional, ill-equiped, inexperienced and if he wins - will be the biggest economic disaster since Carter.

Perhaps, Leon, but WE did not START the wars in Korea, Japan or Germany, and their citizenry for the most part does not wish to see our soldiers slaughtered -- noth unlike Iraq.

The "surge" may have helped McCain among hardcore GOPers, but its going to crush him with Indies and Dems.

Walking out or a present vote does not count. This behavior and inexperience doesn't bode well for making presidential international decisions. Indecisiveness and doing whatever it takes per the poll-tests for popularity...that's obama. He's slick enough not to get caught with an opinion, just rhetoric we all can agree with...If Hillary does not win it for the democrats, will have to vote republican.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/20/us/politics/20obama.html?pagewanted=2&ei=5088&en=8385d348acbab84e&ex=1355806800&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

Robert - even worse than the guy who ran the budget up to $3.3 trillion?

I'm curious too, Robert/NYC.

Surely you're not suggesting we continue with the same house-of-cards, economic sleight-if-hand charade we've seen under Bush and the GOP, are you?

Hey Paul,

Remember all the bad terrible things that were going to happen when Reagan ran the debt to unheard of levels?

What did we get? Hmmmmm.....

Collapse of the Soviet Union, perfection of the internet switches and technology, GPS systems, video games, advanced avionics, advanced power systems, etc... etc... etc...

Line on spending needs to be held - no doubt.

Whats Obama's position on that - tax the hell out of everyone and spend like a drunken sailor.

He is going to be the country's worst disaster if he gets in - he is further to the left than any other candidate out there.

Haven't you people noticed who, internationally, has been called the 'populist' candidate.

Chavez was.

A 'populist' is the guy who promises everything to everyone without a single clue how much damage it will do.

Great speach Obama - we got it on tape. Now please, go harmlessly back to not voting on anything, not saying anything of substance and not taking a stand on anything in your semi-harmless little fantasy world called the U.S. Senate where others can watch over you till YOU GROW UP!

Please!

There are many Obama voters who support him because of his speeches, charisma and likability, not his past achievements...delicious irony because so many Bush sheep voted for him because he was the guy they'd rather have a beer with. Now the shoes on the other foot.

@ Robert,

Well aren't you full of misinformation....if you have an agenda you should at least use factual information to back it up.
In response to your voting present comment: Obama voted present for 130 out 4000 votes. Anyone with a middle school education knows that's 3.25% not 67%.

Obama talks about change, but refuses to explain what he means! He's a liberal and a socialist so change would mean higher taxes, fewer jobs, bigger government and more social programs we can't afford.

As for Iraq he will wave the white flag on the war on terror. All the hard work and blood spilled by our troops will be for nothing and Iraq will be plunged into further chaos. Al Qaeda and the Taliban will see the US is weak and Afghanistan will go the same way. After that we'll see a surge in terrorism through out the Middle East and more attacks on the West.

This is what Obama means by change and why he refuses to be specific. Of course we can count on the left wing media not to press Obama on this while they hit McCain with tough policy questions and try to dig up any dirt they can find.

guevera - i'm highly educated and sorry, obama doesnt get my vote. the dems are done. lol. what a loser party. the educated people voted for kerry and gore too and look what this got us. you guys are lemmings being pulled into disaster ever four years. ridiculous.

WE NEED SOCIALISM?

Are you insane?

France has 19% unemployment and they are the most efficient socialist country on the planet.

We have 5% unemployment. I guess we need to fire 14% of the workforce to get the country back on track.

Fool.

McCain accomplishment?....well, for starters, he made it through AOCS in Pensacola, flew jets off a carrier, and got shot down....not for the faint of heart. I'd say he's tested. I guess he could have just stayed home and went to law school instead.

As a life-long Democrat, MBA graduate, and person of color, I'll hold my breath for 4 more years of a GOP with a President McCain than sell out the Democrat party for generations with a vote for Obama - despite all his eloquent rhetoric, he's a disaster in the making.

Mark, McCain isn't "suggesting we continue with the same house-of-cards, economic sleight-if-hand charade we've seen under Bush and the GOP". He's actually aiming to rein in spending - like all of us have to do in our daily lives. He's even attacking earmarks. You remember earmarks, right? The same ones that Democrats promised to rein in, only to expand them to record levels? Do you think a President Obama will be against the Woodstock Museum being funded with federal tax dollars?

Here's a fact:
When Bush took office the national debt was $5.6 Trillion. After eight years of his rein, four of which the GOP controlled both houses, the national debt is $9.2 trillion. How's that fit into your ideological box?

Hey Mike,

Good point. The 'savior' that shows up and promises to cure all ills, has the magic tonic, the hope for everything to be better.

"Just one sip of this and all your ills will be cured!" - Quote from the snakeoil salesman that hustles out of town after fleecing everyone for their hard earned money.

Or maybe its the guy who takes your hard earned money at gun point through higher taxes and unfortunately STAYS IN TOWN so he can sell you ANOTHER bottle of poison!

Robert - maybe the Dems are so anti-establishment, they subconsciously do not want national office? not sure. clinton was the first dem since the 1940s to win two terms. this wont happen for some time....it's pathetic. part of it is the southern realignment with the republicans, but the other part is the inept nature of the dem party. they are suicidal. i have watched this election with great frustration. when the war was a hot issue, they killed dean, who was a feisty anti-war person. now that it's the economy, the kill two candidates with real economic agendas and go for all talk and no action. This is ridiculous. McCain is already blasting him on lack of experience. He wont be able to scream racism all the way to November. People will get tired of this.