With your permission I will forward this on to the Obama campaign. You have put together a great list for Obama bashing. I am sure that the McCain campaign will happily borrow from this list, but we can beat them at this game with much humor.

You are hilarious!!! Teethbrush?

Where is Tom Payne? I miss him. jeffersonian, can you be Tom Payne?

expanding on my last comment.

It is not Bush or the GOP or the neo cons or anyone else that has been destroying this country.

It is the low information, ignorant, xenophobic religion nuts, hick, sheep..like Mr. Simpson.

http://us.ft.com/ftgateway/superpage.ft?news_id=fto051120081526533438&page=1

These are the people who are have destroyed out country, with their willful ignorance and paranoia. I make no apology for talking down to them, THEY ARE THE PROBLEM.

I only pray, that after this election, things will change in this country. That I will never again be sent to war to clean up the messes made by opportunistic politicians and neo cons....WHO ARE FED and CREATED, by the likes of those who are: scared to death that Saddam (the leader of the taliban) is going to launch VX gas at WalMart and they will not get to "rapture" if gays marry.

Please...Mr Simpson of WV (see link), you are a dolt. In America you have the right to be a stupid moron, but please...I beg you...your mind boggling stupidity affects us all, and drags America into the gutter...so please educate yourself...just a little....Form rational opinions..THEN VOTE.

That was one high carb witty barb.

Laugh a little HateTex!

I'm not sure what your link proves. Yes, we know the economy and Iraq are the top two issues in the current election - not one person here has argued otherwise. Your polls don't list potential SCOTUS nominations as a separate issue, nor do they break down voting statistics by party affiliation or lack thereof.

The fact that the polls don't list SCOTUS as a separate issue should tell you something (much like the famous dog that didn't bark in the night). Still don't believe me? Go to Obama's website and look in the Issues section; SCOTUS doesn't even merit its own separate entry under 'Other Issues'.

Why would these polls need to break down the results by party affiliation, or lack thereof? Given the consistency of the results among all the polls listed there, there's no reason to believe they're a statistically inaccurate sample.

The past 10 elections took place in different times, with different administrations in office, and different issues at the forefront; thus they are of limited value in assessing what voters of any affiliation think important in 2008.

It's true that except for 2004, the Iraq war hasn't been at the forefront of issues, but the economy and national security (or both) have always been the top issues in Presidential elections.

It's called logic...why not use it to prove your point? -- baby_boomerang

Start with an incorrect premise and logic leads you nowhere; hence the phrase Garbage In, Garbage Out.

My point...was that the SCOTUS argument is one here, among political junkies and wonks. Not about making a broad based appeal to the electorate. And the point with SCOTUS is the long term damage those appointments can make. Witness Bush's two choices.

The argument keeps coming up because there are some republican' troll in our midst who keep saying that if Obama wins the nomination they will vote for John McCain. People usually try to appeal to their better nature- why would you do that to the country? - which doesn’t work because they have no better nature. Then we try to reason - look John McCain will have the opportunity to appoint Supreme Court justices! - you don't want that for the future, do you? But they’re not thinking about the common good or future importance of the high court. Because they are republican trolls! -- CeliaInSF

Thanks for your thoughtful response. I guess all I'm trying to say is that outside of the confines of these chatrooms, SCOTUS isn't as important an issue as some purport it to be, and that if Obama tries to make it issue (rather than using it to re-inforce the base), he should be prepared to explain what difference it makes given a Democratic majority in the Senate.

Full confession here: I did not vote for Obama in my primary. However, he clearly will win the nomination. Given that, I have a question for any Democrat who says s/he won't vote for him in November: Do you really want to hand McCain the Supreme Court nominations?

McCain thinks we need more justices like Scalia and Alito. Do you really want that to happen? Will you be able to live with the consequences (and with yourself) if that happens?

It seems to me, my good professor, to be awfully late in the game to asking this question. The time to have asked it with a clear head was when the Oprah started that celebrity nonsense and videos about change. We're all over 18 and we all understand how much it takes to get things done in Washington and that policy winks and experience and friends are in fact much needed. Certainly if not then the time to have stopped all this madness in its tracks was hen Obama charged into South Carolina race-baiting the black vote to divide the electorate. Instead of nonsensically going along with that plain old trash that the Clinton's had suddenly, w/o any explanation, overnight become jackbooted racists. And if you really DID believe it as an AA, than when the memos surfaced that showed it was a full blown part of Axelrods plan THAT was the time to do the right thing.

Asking white women, and yes, hard working whites and hispanics

who had worked so hard and long for the party to stomach what happened from there on forward is simply asking too much.

If you were so worried about the appointments, this seems like a hell of an inopportune time to speak up. The damage is simply done.