The ranking is pretty ridiculous, this is true. This is why I'm convinced that most of the anti-Obama trolls here are Republican shills, because it's pretty hard to believe they'd hate him THAT much when his platform is virtually identical to Clinton's. He supports NAFTA, he would be willing to use force and keep the nuclear option on the table, and though his healthcare plan is different from Hilary's (and, some might legitimately say inferior though I personally think it has a better chance of passing), it has in common the fact that it is far from the type of single-payer system that most of us 'far-left' liberals would prefer. He's an establishment candidate through and through.

HOWEVER (and this is the part that I fear it may be unwise to say, but screw it, it's not like I'm famous) the reason a lot of 'far-left liberals' like myself are quietly supporting him is because we have something between a feeling and a hope that much of this is temporary posturing and that deep down, he is like us. His associations with the Hyde Park intellegentsia, while anathema in the mainstream, give me a sense of hope in that he is willing to fraternize with the sort of people that, while demonized in mainstream media, are par for the course in academic intellectual circles.

And this is the larger point - what's more important than his liberalism is his intellectualism. It comes through in the way he speaks, in the way he responds to questions more directly than other candidates rather than with pre-scripted buzzword-laden catchphrases that make you want to puke. Of course I'm speaking relatively here - I've often wished that he would do this more and use words like 'change' less, but as with other things, I grudgingly accept that as what he needs to do to win. The point is that even if I'm wrong regarding his politics and he proves to be a thoroughly centrist president, this still won't be worse than any of the alternatives we currently have. And if he brings no other improvements, his contribution to raising the bar of political discourse may prove to be more valuable than any specific policy.

If you've been following the way the media dismissively brushes off Obama's 'base' when they speak of the almighty white working class vote, you would think that 'people with college degrees' were some kind of inferior second-class citizens not worthy of consideration (I'm not even gonna touch the similar dismissal of blacks). Of course we're used to this as the Democrats have been brushing us off for years. The logic is that since we're actually informed and smart enough not to base our votes on idiotic emotional reactions to someone's slip of the tongue, you can treat us like shit and we'll still vote for you as long as you're slightly to the left of the other guy. But you have no idea how many far-left friends I've had to argue with after they proclaimed that they don't vote because it just "supports the system" and "they're all the same". Obama has brought in a lot of that crowd among the young. If you think that Obama can be shelved on the basis of not appealing to white people and these young supporters will still come out and vote for Hilary, you're wrong.

Yea, he distributed sexual photos of a minor, but he was also a minor himself, which kind of neutralizes the exploitation factor. Not to mention that 16 is the legal age of consent in many states. It should be treated the same way that such a case between two adults would be treated, with a charge of violation of privacy or something similar.

One of my friends refers to the phenomenon of evangelical Southern girls doing anal in order to stay 'virgins' as "The Missouri Compromise".

Thanks to Alkaline for pointing this out. Results of the google search:

-Francis Gregory Neubeck, Republican, Florida. Failed run for U.S. House of Representatives in Florida in 1986

-Posted by: Greg Neubeck | January 15, 2008 at 06:51 AM. Ha! I always wanted to see the Clintons go to prison, but not like this!

-Greg Neubeck (not verified) says:. Does America really want Clinton style Socialism?

Word of advice: when trolling enemy sites, at least have the sense to use a pseudonym. You know, like Shawn_WM or something of that sort. Run along now.

I don't know why this photo makes him look like some sort of evil wizard who has just paralyzed and levitated his foe with some telekinetic spell. As an Obama supporter, I hope I'm the only one who sees that, because it would hardly be the silliest justification I've heard people come up with so far for not liking him.

The only way I can read your claim as anything other than a bald-faced lie is if you happen to be new to Salon. Poke around the site a bit. Read some posts by Shawn_WM, ProudTexasGirl, or KateTex, and then get back to me on how much more civil Clinton supporters are.

The ridiculous assertion that gays have achieved full equality aside, will someone tell me what purpose pride parades of any sort serve? A useless distraction, a vapid display, an opiate to make people feel good about themselves without actually effecting any meaningful change, a seeking of attention for its own sake, and most importantly, fodder to energize the conservatives and to be mocked on the latest episode of South Park. The Onion said it best:

www.theonion.com/content/node/28491

As the good-humoured response from the women M.P.s suggests, Berlusconi's comments may not be that out of the ordinary in the context of Italian culture, where flirtatiously complimenting a woman's appearance is seen as charming rather than a declaration of war upon female dignity. Perhaps Broadsheet reporters need to travel more.