So we hold these people like animals for 7 years. We torture them. We give a "trial" before a kangaroo court.

Then the jury unexpectedly comes back and says "This guy was bad, but not THAT bad. He has just about served his time."

With his time nearly served, he can look forward to-

remaining a prisoner with no rights whatsoever indefinitely.

This is what America has become. This is why the PUMAs are below contempt in my book. They are willing to let what little is left of the Constitution be flushed away in what amounts to a todller-like temper tantrum because they didn't get their way.

This is the story of the 21st century. America has been in the hands of true fascists for this entire century. We have a chance to repair some of the damage that has been done. So what are we doing? We are crying that the whole world is sexist because a woman didn't win the primary. We are worshipping flag pins. We are turning a blind eye to blatant crimes being committed by the White House because two overrated actors had twins.

America is in real danger. Not from terrorists, rogue nations or China, but from within. The American Dream has become a nightmare. The foundations that are necessary for a democracy to succeed are crumbling beneath our feet, just like our roads, bridges and other infrastructure.

It does give me some hope that the jury behaved as a jury should instead of just seeing a Muslim tied to bin Laden and wanting to thrown the book at him. There is hope for America. This jury could easily have been vindictive instead of objectinve and done what the people who murdered Saddam Hussein did. They didn't. The problem is higher up. And if you aren't helping defeat McCain in November, you are putting your own childish emotions before the needs of our country.

This article ultimately feels like a fluff piece to fill the politcal news gap while Obama is on vacation. No offense meant to Ms. Jamieson, but her analyses seemed empty of any real insight into the fundamental question that titles the article. She dissects the commercials, but has very little to say about their impact.

When asked about the impact of the ads, she answers in vague politcal science truisms instead of giving real insight. We all know that Obama's ads are going to resonate with Obama voters and the facts in the ads will be selectively ignored by Obama haters and vice versa. The real question of who is winning the message war is not how the candidates' supporters view them. I doubt if any politcal ad has ever swayed a supporter.

The question of who is winning the message war is a question about undecided voters and voters who are leaning one way, but not entirely sold on their candidate. Nothing in the article addressed these crucial voters, so the article ends up feeling hollow. I have read the article twice and still have no new insight into whose ads are most effectively moving the undecided voters.

"There are some fundamentalist Christians who have decided that Allah is actually a pagan moon god who was worshiped on the Arabian peninsula before the rise of Islam."

This line cannot be factually accurate. Anyone who would make that make claim is clearly NOT interpreting the Bible literally. Muslims, Jews and Christians all share the same religious beginnings according to the Bible, so anyone claiming otherwise is not a true fundamentalist.

I said in the summer of 2000 that George W. Bush would be the worst thing that could possibly happen to Christianity and he has not let me down. George Bush has turned more people off to God than anything since perhaps the Inquisition. "Fundamentalism" is now a dirty word to most of the country.

But it doesn't have to be so. Much of what is called "fundamentalism" is no more a true reflection of the Bible than the teachings of Osama bin Laden are of the Koran. One can believe that the Bible is the literal Word of God, passed down through men and reject the hatred of the religious right. The Bible is not incompatible with science or liberalism.

There are far too many "preachers" who are nothing but GOP operatives pushing their political views from the pulpit, selectively quoting (or misquoting) the few passages in the Bible that reinforce their politcal views. This liberal fundamentalist firmly believes that a lot of the so-called "fundamentalist preachers" are going to be rather hot in the afterlife.