It has since been implemented in most other blogging tools. This enables authors to keep track of who is linking to, or referring

Not to sound like I’m defending Christian fundamentalists (or GWB) who want to insert religious beliefs/indoctrination into schools, gov’t, etc . . . but I don’t see a lot of them flying planes into buildings, strapping bombs to children or using other tactics practiced by actual jihadists.

I’m not sure who you are really trying to insult: Christian fundlmentalists — almost none of whom use or advocate violence as a means to further their cause — or actual jihadists — who probably look at Christian fundamentalists as wimps for their relative nonviolence.

I think fundamentalists of all ilk give us enough fodder without painting all of them as terrorists.

Obama being likened to Kennedy, a Democrat, and the only one to run against McCain. Youth versus an old dude. A new way versus “4 more years”. Religous extremism out the window.

Religous nuts alienated by BOTH candidates. Republicans P!$$ed at the sorry state of “conservatism”. A minority turnout like none other.

Even a bad psychic ought to be able to call this one!

No thanks. There’s enough messianic talk surrounding Obama already.

I’m sure he’s a nice guy, but left leaners like him forget that when they draw the “wealthy” line, they ignore the fact that the cost of living can vary by a order of magnitude even within the same state. “Wealthy” in Ohio is not wealthy in Southern California.

I hope Obama wins, but if he does I’m sure it will have absolutely nothing to do with Uranus.

Robert

It’s the usual sport of the frothing ideologues claiming Americans are so foul and evil, meanwhile everyone else in the world is just as bad (or worse) in their own ways. Meanwhile, racial and ethnic slaughter and cleansing go on all over the world. It’s *human* that basically suck, not any particular group. Anything else is that magic combination of politics and mental illness that seems to be sweeping the planet more and more these days.

If “holier than thou” attitudes could be converted to energy, Europe could launch their whole continent into orbit. The hypocrisy is neck deep over there.

What was I saying?

Oh right… Uranus is the interesting planet! You Uranus-haters make me sick!

..and congrats on the new digs.

http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2008/07/this_is_depressing_barack_obama_promises.php

and here:

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/07/obama_and_faithbased_initiativ.php

Now, would I prefer a candidate who would not only abolish the office of faith-based initiatives, but also try to revoke churches’ tax exemption? Absolutely. But I know I’m not going to get that; so, I’ll settle for someone that I think will at least curtail the wingnut welfare and redirect the program towards genuine charity. Or I could vote for Nader again…

- Jack

This election is the Democrats to lose. With GWB’s approval rating where it’s been the past few years, you’d think all they’d need is a candidate with a pulse to beat anyone who even mildly aligns himself with the current administration. However the protracted Barrack-Hillary war revealed far more than I think either candidate wanted to that early. Their little love fest last week to show “unity” did do the trick for me. Outside of being completely staged and orchestrated (well, what isn’t in politics?), it showed the hypocrisy of political campaigns in general. “Hey, all that mud we were slinging at each other the past year and a half? We didn’t really mean it. This person’s really all right. It’s ‘The Other Guy’ who’s the bad one.”

- Jack

First off, I totally agree that racism (as well as a host of other evil “isms”) are alive and well in the U.S. I don’t believe he was calling any specific person a racist. But, I believe, implied in his statement, is the assertion that Obama is unelectable because he is black.

(As an aside, I wasn’t aware that the rest of the western world was so enlightened that the U.S. was the only place where black people were underrepresented in high office, but I digress)

Certainly, his promise to spend public money on “faith-based initiatives” a la GWB didn’t help him woo my vote. I wonder why I seem to be the only person on this blog bothered by that?

I think you’ve misinterpreted Hoonser’s statement. It didn’t say if you oppose Obama, then you are racist. Unfortunately, there are still enough racists around to make it difficult for Obama to win.

Sheesh…as Harlan Ellison has said, the two most common things in the Universe are Hydrogen and Stupidity….

It’s worth pointing out that if an astrologer has a 50/50 chance of getting each election right, after 10 elections, one in 1024 astrologers (on average) will have gotten all 10 right. So it’s actually *expected* that *someone* nails them all.

This is why I put little credence in bogus statistics like “As goes X, so goes the nation”.

You can change it back for the bible belt anyway.

THAT is certainly true. An interesting poll that backs that statement is here:

http://www.usaelectionpolls.com/2008/exit-polls/race-ethnicity.html

White voters were polled from every state, indicating what percentage voted for Obama. Now, understanding Jason’s point that it may be irresponsible to assign not voting for Obama purely to racism, the poll is very telling in that the following states had the lowest support for Obama:

Arkansas – 16%
Kentucky – 22%
Florida – 23%
S. Carolina – 24%
Alabama – 25%
Tennessee – 26%
West Virginia – 28%
Oklahoma – 29%

These were the only states with less than 30% of white voters supporting Obama… make of it what you will.

The overall numbers still support Obama at this point in the upcoming election, so I’d still stand by my original point… but you are right about the Bible belt, Jeffersonian.

Actually I would say everyone making a prediction in 2000 can claim they were right. If they said Bush, he was elected, if they said Gore, he got the popular vote. It was a win-win for anyone making a prediction…except the pundits.

@Celtic_Evolution Says:
“I think Americans are by and large still too racist to elect a black man.”
You can change it back for the bible belt anyway.

@Tyler Durden Says:
“we’re more or less over our sexist tendencies but have a long way left to go on our bigotry.”
True. Even though, historically, the reverse was true in some ways (with black men having the right to vote before women, etc.).