But I don't think...

-- Ron Pauliac

That is pretty obvious to anyone who reads your posts, independent of what account you are posting on.

Accusing the left of “whining” considering that the rightwing’s ENTIRE PLATFORM for 2008 is to cry FOUL incessantly and avoid any talk of "-- JKP1000

Wait wait wait wait wait!

The GOP has an actual platform?! I thought they were just making it up as they go, y'know, like McCain does.

Even Kerry--in Salon itself--now says he should have gone on the attack when the Swiftboating began. Obama might be wise to wait till the convention is over so that they can blow their whole wad, but for God's sake, the instant it's done, please eviscerate these bastards without mercy. This isn't a school election and the fate of the world is at stake.

McCain doesn't deserve to win and the Democrats have no reason to be nice. It's not like they get credit for courtesy. "Nice" is weakness in this context, and the "high road" may make Democrats feel good about themselves. But being in power would feel better. They didn't spare the attacks in 2006 and they won the Seante. Tell ya anything?

Swear to god, do NOT screw this up, Obama.

-Hardly. I'd say that idea better suits Democrats. Higher taxes, abortion as birth control, surrender as foreign policy, deprivation as energy policy, and government as nanny? Oh yeah, that'll make people want to vote Democrat.-

Why are you so confused man?

Higher taxes? The only ones who are going to be paying higher taxes are those who had their taxes reduced by Bush because Bush just thinks the richest men should be richer still. Are you one of these richer than rich men who can easily afford to pay more? If not why are you so in favor of the favoritism shown them?

Abortion is a form of birth control. Abortion controls births. You may not like abortions (and believe it or not nobody does) but to somehow imply abortion is not a form of birth control is really ignorant.

Surrender as foreign policy? Well that's just what the Repugs tell you Democrats stand for not what Obama, Biden or any other Democrats actually say. So do you just listen to the rhetoric of the Repugs without critically analyzing their words or do you take their words as gospel much as you would from a priest?

Deprivation as energy policy? You make us all laugh you are so confused. Do you really, really think Dems are for less energy or no energy or something? Perhaps you only understand what the Repugs say about energy because they use only one word, that being Drill. It is a single syllable and easy to understand. Whereas the Dems, and Obama in particular, are for developing multiple energy sources, some of which include solar and wind. So my question for you is a simple one: Do you hate the Sun so much that you wouldn't let it provide for us all the free, clean energy we could ever need?

And last but not least, government as nanny? Excuse me, which party tried to pass a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage? Which party talks endlessly about protecting your weak ass from the evil terrorists? Which party voted in lockstep to expand the President's power to eavesdrop on you and read your emails just like a big, great daddy to us all?

Damn son, you got every single one of them backwards didn't you? Maybe some day you'll feel as stupid as you look to the rest of us.

...They're only claimed when a practical loss has occurred.

Let's just have a victory, period, for once.

Have you found that Zionist Oil yet?

Both McCain and Obama support an Interventionist foreign policy, ready and able to spill the blood of American teenagers for Zionist Oil.

http://letters.salon.com/c7f6f9bff9c8ef57f6a3106ce42c8648/author/index160.html

You do realize it is only olive oil, don't you? There is no petroleum in Israel.

Reading some of the letters talking about how the D's are getting hit and not hitting back, there would be a great correlation to put out an ad showing this and comparing to what it says in the Bible about turning the other cheek. Essentially put together a greatest hits of the R's and show what respect the D's are givng them by not hitting back and then ask WWJD.

I think this would point out the pure hypocracy of the R's and their relation with the religious right and claims to have Jesus on their side. Of course I could be wrong since I am an Atheist.

Nice try, but that list, and the language therein, is so loaded as to be worthless.

"Giveaway"? It has been Alaska's policy since oil was discovered on the North Slope to share the revenue with all residents, a policy that began in the late '70s. Put in that context, your loaded little word "giveaway" is shown to be the propaganda it is.

Likewise for "Alaska requested ..." Well, was it Gov. Palin herself, or perhaps a congressman or senator? Can't tell from the headline, but again your little propaganda slides by uncritical readers.

Obama was for unconditional surrender in Iraq years ago. If he'd gotten his way, the radical Islamists and al Qaeda would have been handed a huge propaganda victory, and Iraq would be fare more dangerous place today. Bush, Petraeus, McCain and others now say we can pull troops out that our objectives are being met and al Qaeda in Iraq has been crushed. Big difference.

Obama said he would meet with President I'm-a-nutjub of Iran, Chavez of Venezuela and others "without preconditions." The Bush administration (as well as the EU) is talking to Iran presently with a long list of preconditions. It's not the talking that's the problem; it's the naive idea that you can negotiate with people like this in good faith.

In short, your list is the usual highly selective, slickly worded crap I expect from the Left.