****

Oh & Dave you were right about one thing :

“Nice Presidental Candidate you got there, Phil.”

Yes Barack Obama is the best US Presidential candidate for a very long time. There hasn’t been an American politican this good since JFK!

But you reverted to your usual completely wrong status when you ranted about your next president -lets hope :

“The only thing of note he’s done in his life, apart from hanging around a racist church for 20 years, to is fund the murderous ideas of a terrorist.”

Not true.

1) Obama has been a Senator passing,asmending and preventing many bills from becoming law.

2) Obama won the Democratic Party nomination for President beating Hiliary Clinton and a whole lot of others.

Plus

3) Obama’s written a book, “Audacity of Hope’

4) given inspirational speeches, and
5) his campaign has changed the culture creating new hope for the UnitedStates and World communities.

As for your Retardican parties mud-slinging slanders – you are just plain wrong and offensive.

Obama’s church may not be your or my idea of the perfect church (ceraytinly notmine as I’m against all organised religions) but racist? Not exactly. More like anti-racist actually in having affirmative action maybe & from recognising the realities facing the African -American community.

And the “weatherman” humbug? Sheesh. Obama was 8 at the time and hardly knew the guy- then or later. If that’s not the Retardicans going for a new low in longest dirty scraping at the bottom of the barrel gutter politics then I don’t know what is …

CORRECTED VERSION :

Uh Dave : “You know what anti-science is, Phil?

Yes – he does. I’d trust Dr Phil Plait’s word on what’s pro & anti-Science any day given he’s been a practicing scientist & science educator for a very long time now.

As opposed to ..well what is your expertise in that area Dave?

Dave : “If we go by his actions, Barry Obama is the most-antiscience presidental candidate ever.”

Nonsense Dave! Are you from a parallel planet or something? Have you forgotten the current “president” George II already? (Or the Shadow President Cheney who’s pulling his strings?)

The most anti-science candidate ever is “Shrubya” George W. Bush the Mad with that Planetarium-hating & creationist-partnering fool McCain as the next worst.

BrianX Said on October 7th, 2008 at 11:38 pm
“quasidog:

It may seem obvious to you (hell, you’d think it looks obvious by looking at fivethirtyeight or electoral-vote), but I don’t think anyone on the Obama side is calling this one in the bag, not after the widespread corruption of the last two cycles. In fact, a great many of us liberals are convinced that the fix is in. Hell, I still think the fix was in in 2006 and the Democrats retook Congress in spite of it.”

I’ve got a horrible sinking feeling that the Republican party re-election plan involves war breaking out before the end of Bush Junior’s term with an incident being provoked or manufactured. My prediction is either the USA directly or its proxy Israel will be launch a war on, probably Iran and, possibly, also other unfortunate South-West Asian nations before Bush the Lesser departs.

Then they’ll use the “we’re at war,can’t change, patriotism as scoundrels last refuge” excuse to either re-elect their puppet ( & I don’t think Bush or McCain are more than figureheads on a very dark and nasty iceberg) – or postpone or even cancel the election entirely.

Maybe this sounds paranoid but its not like there’s no precedent -Iraq for one. I wouldn’t paut itpast them -the NeoCon’s really are that evil.

I think the best thing the Democratic party – & Americans in general – can do now is act immediately to impeach Bush and his puppet-masters without any delay!

Why this hasn’t already happpened is something I find utterly staggering given the seriousness of Bush’es misconduct and the crimes of his regime.

Nations posing you no threat have been wrongly invaded and destroyed.

Hundreds of thousands of innocent people – & US soldiers – have been killed and maimed and had their lives ruined.

Yet this “president” gets away scot-free!?

Whereas Clinton was facing impeachment simply by lying over a consensual sexual affair that hurt no-one physically and only a few people emotionally.

How the blazes does that make any sort of sense?!!

I can’t dispute the evidence you presented to back this claim. Literally, I can’t.