From what I see, McCain is not doing well in issue preparation. He didn’t outline his plans in economy in depth. All he did was responding to Obama’s economic plan instead of coming up with his own. And although I commend McCain for having defended Obama about Wright (source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/03/18/mccain-obama-does-not-s_n_92076.html), Palin did repeatedly use Wright to attack Obama in her rallies, but the tactic didn’t work. Most of the time, McCain campaign focuses on attacking Obama instead of talking about solution. On the contrary, Obama’s campaign has spent most of their time and their ads talking about economy and responding to McCain’s attack.

I understand your point of view, as I said before, you have obviously done your homework and gave a valid basis for your argument although I do not always agree with your views.

Although we do not share the same view, but I have a good time arguing with you.

I don’t think Obama’s campaign has been all that, because he never prepared his positions, and that’s why he can’t close. He keeps getting caught out, and leaving an opening. He focussed on the process, and not enough on issue preparation. He sells well, but has a jury-rigged product.

McCain has run a worse campaign, it seems, because his circumstances were very different. He won his primary early, but had little base support. Fund-raising and ground game development were poor as a result… until Palin.

He also had to do the media’s job. He lacked the money and resources to do it.

He avoided anything to do with race, so couldn’t use Wright, Farrakhan, or Frank against Obama. Those were big guns he shelved.

He’s running on a tarnished party platform. He has less money. What’s amazing is that he’s still in this race. His campaign may be better than you think. Mostly, though, he just won’t quit. You can’t knock him out. He may yet win. He’s better than you think.

Too much of Obama is specifically concealed. Minor revelations here and there seem to be building a consistent theme, like pieces of a jigsaw puzzle.

Completely different personal situations get different treatment.

You might want to note the fact that Bush government recently sent citizens rebate checks. Do you remember? How about unemployment benefits from the government? $700 billion bailout? Your social security? Medicare? Don’t you think that those have socialistic elements in there?

I would say that you have done you homework and you have given a valid argument. However, I too can go on and on with the facts and my opinions. However, since I have no intention in making you switch positions nor do I expect you to change mine, I think it’s going to be a whole other pointless debates and a waste of time, don’t you think?

And please also understand that the main reason why I think Obama is a better candidate is not just from his compelling and complicated history. But also from the way he runs his campaign, his way of thinking and addressing issues, and by comparing those with John McCain’s.

So, do you mind if I say that we respectfully agree to disagree?

Actually, I’m a former Brit who is now a Canadian. There is a difference, as you say. However, I’ve lived in Canada for many years and traveled throughout the country, as I have throughout the US. This year, I have spent time in Chicago, Atlantic City, Albuquerque, Savannah, Syracuse and many times in Washington. I’ll be in DC most of next week, as a matter of fact. And I was in the UK twice this year. So I do travel quite a bit, meet a lot of people, and therefore feel my observations are valid.

On the attitudes of Brits living in the UK, I can only say that there is an innate, though low level, envy/jealousy of the US among many, resulting from the US taking over world leadership which they felt was always their right. A stay in North America changes that – for some of them!

I agree with just about everything you have said in your posts, although you are a bit harder on Canadians than I am. Maybe the attitudes you have met are those of Brits now living there who have yet to shake off the views I mention!

These are indeed troubling times for the US. I see today that in Ohio, individuals can now use a park bench as their “residence” to become a registered voter. No doubt it will turn out that by next Tuesday, every Ohio park bench will have ten or more registered ACORN “residents.” Yet what amazes me is there has been little public outcry against this outright fraud across the country. I pray that it may show up next Tuesday.

As for Kelvin, I can only suggest that he looks at http://colony14.net/id41.html. If he can still believe in Obama after reading even a quarter of this very well researched and fully documented history of the man, then there’s nothing anyone can do to change his mind.

However, I will offer you some proof of Obama Socialist views. A Scoialist, btw, is someone who advocates Socialism.

Using taxes to redistribute incomes is Socialistic. That’s controlling the means of production by reallocating a resource (money). “Spreading the wealth.”

Healthcare as a right (the 3rd debate). Not a privilege. Not a responsibility. A right. Mandating healthcare, thus establishing control. Businesses that don’t provide it will be forced to provide it or face “fines”.

Controlling the Media (Fairness Doctrine). This was an idea put into place decades ago, when the amount of media was limited. It was an attempt to force the MSM to be balanced. What it did was shut down little guys, because they couldn’t afford to fight the lawsuits. It was discarded. Obama has stated his support for resurrecting it, thus limiting political discourse to the big guys (the ones on his side) and with government oversight/control.

Housing. Obama has been a big backer of the CRA, actually acting as a lawyer for those forcing banks to make bad loans to ucnreditworthy people. They effectively seized assets of banks under the CRA, determining who gets loans, rather than the banks getting to determine that.

NAFTA. Obama wants to start putting more controls on free trade.

Open ballots for Unions, instead of secret ballots. This will force people into unions through coercion. These will then be beholden to his party. If that’s not a means of production, what is?

Closing loopholes on corporate taxes, taking away legitimate deductions.

Volunteerism. Rewarding “volunteerism” Oxymoronic idea)with college funding. A National Civilian “Peace” Force as large as the Army. This is code for brownshirts or blackshirts. Or think Hitler Youth.

Judicial Activism. “Special sensitivity to the needs of the poor.” “The inherent flaw in the Constitution.” “To go beyond the limits of the Constitution to spread the opportunity.”

I could go on, but you get my point. He’s talking about nothing less than eventual complete control. Marxism. Socialism. This Guy is SCARY!

“Barack Obama and the Strategy of Manufactured Crisis” posted at

americanthinker.com

last month about 9/28. The article will fill you in on all his associations and connect the dots.

Should be required reading for any voter — or at least anyone still laboring under the false assumption that our Barry is a benign being.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/27/campbell.brown.palin.diva/index.html

It is not logically possible that Sarah Palin could go “rogue.” As the candidate for office she is the principal – the aides who are, by definition, “aides” could (and apparently did) go rogue. As the principal, the candidate makes the decisions. If an aide disagrees it is he who must adapt or quit.