I think this is the first of its kind. Senator McCain is going to speak direct to camera to Barack Obama. I'm not going to give away many more details than that. But suffice to say it's going to be a very exciting ad, and I think it's going to get a lot of attention.

The former president, speaking in Denver, posed a hypothetical question in which he seemed to suggest that that the Democratic Party was making a mistake in choosing Obama as its presidential nominee.

He said: "Suppose for example you're a voter. And you've got candidate X and candidate Y. Candidate X agrees with you on everything, but you don't think that person can deliver on anything. Candidate Y disagrees with you on half the issues, but you believe that on the other half, the candidate will be able to deliver. For whom would you vote?"

Obama's house in the affluent Chicago neighborhood of Hyde Park is worth more than $1.5 million, and he has made millions from the publication of two autobiographical books.

It occurs to me that John McCain is as intellectually shallow as our current president. When asked what his Christian faith means to him, his answer was a one-liner. "It means I'm saved and forgiven." Great scholars have wrestled with the meaning of faith for centuries. McCain then retold a story we've all heard a hundred times about a guard in Vietnam drawing a cross in the sand.

Asked about his greatest moral failure, he cited his first marriage, which ended in divorce. While saying it was his greatest moral failing, he offered nothing in the way of explanation. Why not?

Throughout the evening, McCain chose to recite portions of his stump speech as answers to the questions he was being asked. Why? He has lived 71 years. Surely he has some thoughts on what it all means that go beyond canned answers culled from the same speech he delivers every day.

He was asked "if evil exists." His response was to repeat for the umpteenth time that Osama bin Laden is a bad man and he will pursue him to "the gates of hell." That was it.

He was asked to define rich. After trying to dodge the question -- his wife is worth a reported $100 million -- he finally said he thought an income of $5 million was rich.

One after another, McCain's answers were shallow, simplistic, and trite. He showed the same intellectual curiosity that George Bush has -- virtually none.

"In the Senate, Barack Obama has voted in lockstep with President George W. Bush nearly half the time, including the Bush-Cheney Energy bill which gave close to 3 billion dollars in new giveaways to Big Oil – a terrible policy that John McCain opposed," said McCain spokesman Tucker Bounds. "The truth is Barack Obama’s plan is a job killing machine that ignores the struggling economy and raises taxes on family savings, social security and small businesses.”

First of all, I thought Barack Obama always put his party ahead of his country.

Senior McCain advisor Steve Schmidt said in a memo released to reporters. “We have seen Barack Obama forced choose between principle and the interests of himself and his party. He has always chosen the latter,” Schmidt wrote.

But if he votes with Bush "nearly half of the time" wouldn't that mean that he votes AGAINST his party nearly half the time?

Secondly, Obama is supposed to have the "most liberal voting record" in the Senate, even more liberal than the Senate's Socialist, Bernie Sanders.

"All I said was his voting record is more to the left than the announced Socialist in the United States Senate, Bernie Sanders of Vermont," Senator McCain said according to a video of the interview posted online.

But how can he vote with Bush nearly half the time, AND be the most liberal senator in history? Did GW Bush turn into a flaming liberal while no one was watching? Hmmm...

Finally, Tucker says Obama is in "lockstep" with Bush because he voted with him "nearly half the time". So wouldn't John McCain be in super-lockstep with bush? After all, McCain voted with Bush nearly 95% of the time. A number considerably larger than "nearly half".

Someone, perhaps one of our friends in the corporate media, should ask Tucker Bounds about these, ummm, inconsistencies.

<a href="http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/06/26/mccain-camp-obama-puts-himself-first/">Senior McCain advisor</a> Steve Schmidt said in a memo released to reporters. “We have seen Barack Obama forced choose between principle and the interests of himself and his party. He has always chosen the latter,” Schmidt wrote.

<a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/07/19/2308539.htm">"That's his voting record.</a> All I said was his voting record is more to the left than the announced Socialist in the United States Senate, Bernie Sanders of Vermont," Senator McCain said according to a video of the interview posted online.

“We know what kind of campaign [Republicans are] going to run. They’re going to make you afraid. They’re going to try to make you afraid of me. ‘He’s young and inexperienced, and he’s got a funny name. And did I mention he’s black?’”

Other than his relative inexperience and some of his stated policy positions, I have zero problems with Barack Obama. His age does not bother me, his name does not bother me and the color of his skin most especially does not bother me. Quite the opposite. I’m proud of what he’s accomplished precisely because of the color of his skin. I’m proud of what he’s accomplished precisely because of his disadvantaged youth. His is an inspirational story, and his historic campaign has made America a better place to live.

As a Republican with a conservative point of view, I have written more on the greatness of black America, and the need for my party to reach out to that community, than just about anyone I know. Many of the single black moms I knew were some of the most “conservative” people I had ever met. They were death on a cracker when it came to law and order, going to church, staying in school, right and wrong, and personal responsibility, and it was and is my belief that their “real-life” success stories could only make the Republican Party a better and less hypocritical entity.

The more Negroes who register as Democrats in the South, the sooner the Negrophobe whites will quit the Democrats and become Republicans. That's where the votes are. Without that prodding from the blacks, the whites will backslide into their old comfortable arrangement with the local Democrats.

Asked whom they trust more to handle the economy, 54 percent named Obama, while 35 percent said McCain. Obama also holds double-digit leads on dealing with the federal budget deficit and on immigration. On social issues such as abortion and same-sex civil unions, 56 percent prefer Obama, 32 percent McCain.

I think that we’ve proven that both parents are important in the success of a family so, no I don’t believe in gay adoption.

"McCain could have been clearer in the interview in stating that his position on gay adoption is that it is a state issue, just as he made it clear in the interview that marriage is a state issue.  He was not endorsing any federal legislation.

McCain’s expressed his personal preference for children to be raised by a mother and a father wherever possible.  However, as an adoptive father himself, McCain believes children deserve loving and caring home environments, and he recognizes that there are many abandoned children who have yet to find homes.  McCain believes that in those situations that caring parental figures are better for the child than the alternative."

But John McCain's answer to the question didn't include even a mention of federalism or state's rights. So how, based on what the candidate said, can you claim that he was really talking about the issue of federalism?

Ah...but there i go again judging the candidate based on what he actually said and not what his campaign claims he meant three days later.

And btw, this whole "gay issues are states problems" is the biggest dodge I think i've ever seen on the issue. He doesn't want  to deal with it so he passes the buck and the responsibility onto the state.

If we had left voting rights to Alabama and Mississippi, black people would still be having trouble voting.

And if you think Alabama and Mississippi are anyway near ready to recognize my rights as a human being, let alone my right to "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" you're delusional.

Gay rights is and should be a federal issue. I'm not worried about the Californias or the Massachusetts that are out there. It's the states with a long history of discrimination and bigotry i'm worried about.  

The South Carolinas and Mississippis and Alabamas of the world are NEVER going to find their way to equality unless we have federal leadership.

But John McCain wants to leave it to the states because he thinks its ok that a gay person in Tennessee can be legally discriminated against. And he doesn't want to change that fact.

On this issue, John McCain is a coward.

it is strategically and morally essential for the United States to support the Government of Iraq to become capable of governing itself and safeguarding its people.

It would be a grave mistake to leave before Al Qaeda in Iraq is defeated and before a competent, trained, and capable Iraqi security force is in place and operating effectively.

To describe AQI's presence, intelligence experts cite a spectrum of estimates, ranging from 8 percent to 15 percent. The fact that such "a big window" exists, says Vincent Cannistraro, former chief of the CIA's Counterterrorism Center, indicates that "[those experts] really don't have a very good perception of what is going on."

It's notable that military intelligence reports have opted to cite a figure at the very top of that range. But even the low estimate of 8 percent may be an overstatement, if you consider some of the government's own statistics.

So even if we concede that AQI must be dealt with, there are obviously far greater concerns.  Indeed, as of March 07, at least 85% of the violence was caused by some other group or faction.

So I would say, on our list of priorities AQI is pretty low on the list when you look at the numbers.

Thirdly, John McCain shows a surprising lack of grasp on this issue. Never in the history of the world has an occupying force defeated a guerilla army. AQI is a guerilla army. We cannot defeat them. We can harm them. We can pursue them. We can hunt them down and make their lives miserable, but to somehow think you'll ever fully defeat an institution thats willing to strap bombs to themselves. They are not afraid of death. And they can hide among a population that looks like them, speaks like them, and shares many of the same customs and traditions.

It's Vietnam all over again.

But there I go again, learning lessons from history.

Fourthly, we've been training Iraqi security forces for five years. I mean, we won World War II in the time its taking us just to train a "competent, trained and capable" security force. At a certain point, you have to wonder if the Iraqi's are really putting as much into this as we are.

It seems John McCain's plan really only amounts to one word: "STAY". Because staying, in John McCain's eyes is the solution, and not the problem.

Finally, the Iraq section of his website (a whopping 17 paragraphs! really, it is nice to know that the man who wants us to stay for 100 years has thought about it to such an extent as to warrant 17 whole paragraphs) concludes with this:

But I do not believe that anyone should make promises as a candidate for President that they cannot keep if elected. To promise a withdrawal of our forces from Iraq, regardless of the calamitous consequences to the Iraqi people, our most vital interests, and the future of the Middle East, is the height of irresponsibility.

Al Maliki, acting at the height of irresponsibility and without regard to the calamitous consequences of the Iraqi people when he says:

"The current trend is to reach an agreement on a memorandum of understanding either for the departure of the forces or a memorandum of understanding to put a timetable on their withdrawal."

John McCain wants to "win" in Iraq, regardless of whether or not the Iraqi's want us to "win". But he doesn't even have much of a plan except continue what we've been doing.

That's change you can beleive in!

"Anything that showed John Hagee giving a sermon - because he films and markets those as well - were taken down because they were considered copyright infringements."