OK…let’s compare experience of a few Presidents. We have you on record concerning Obama’s accomplishments at this point in his career. How does he compare to Dubya’s accomplishments prior to his run for the Presidency?

David Kuo, my favorite Beliefnet contributor says that mortal politicians are prone to let us down. I agree. I also believe that Barack Obama is a mortal politician.
Although,compared to the Bush/Cheney Republicn Congressional tenure racket, Barack’s a light in the darkness. Consider the following:
1. Bush was so ashamed of the costs of Iraq, he kept it out of the annually published budget. (Barack’s not planning on keeping us in Iraq for the next 100 years like McCain)
2. Bush has sent over 3,000 American troops to their deaths for lies (there were no WMDs and the so-called democratic government doesn’t extend outside the green zone). The UN weapons inspections were working. Hans Blix wanted only the time the Bush/Halliburton coalition had promised to complete his job. Neocons would have none of that. How else could they line their pockets with troops’ blood? (Barack, unlike McCain was against the war from the beginning)
Countless troops with missing limbs, PTSD, severe head injuries are being sent back to a broken VA system all so the wealthiest wouldn’t be taxed.
Neocons told us that we’d be greeted in Iraq with chocolates and floweres. (Barack literally said, “This is gonna be a stupid war.” when an unsuspecting public was eating out of Bush’s hand.
3. Bush wants more no-bid contracts for Halliburton and Blackwater, so he wants us to invade Iran which poses no immediate threat according to intelligence agencies [i.e., CIA & State Dept. (Michele my challenge is still on for you to cite non-Neocon organizations – Rand Instute & Heritage Foundation can’t be cited – that say Iran’s a threat. They should be government organizations).
(Barack understands that PAKISTAN HAS NUKES AND AL QAEDA IS MORE POPULAR THAN THE DE FACTO GOVT. THERE)
4. Bush had his head up is rear when Katrina hit. (just listen to Obama speak and you know he’s smarter than to spend an extra day on vacation during a national disaster).
Sorry Michele, Barack’s not the messiah, he’s just a mortal bidding against the Antichrist establishment.

Brian Horan: “Sorry Michele, Barack’s not the messiah, he’s just a mortal bidding against the Antichrist establishment.”
And he looks a heck of a lot better than anything else on the market right now.

And Obama looks better and better the more you examine his likely GOP opponent.
http://blog.beliefnet.com/crunchycon/2008/02/mccains-clay-feet.html
McCain waffled on the torture issue. He was against it, but now he voted for allowing our forces to torture prisoners.
Michelle…do you really think Obama should worry about a bill from a few years ago when the GOP candidate is placing fresh meat before the electorate?

Silly lefties – don’t you know that as soon as you poijnt to a fact, the foxnews sponsored columnist here is required to ignore you and move on to less substantive matters, like hoillering nonsequitors about how Obama lacks substance?
It appears your pearls are wasted by tossing them before this lot.

“”"
McCain waffled on the torture issue. He was against it, but now he voted for allowing our forces to torture prisoners.
“”"
Your Kool-Aid fails you. The issue has to do with applying the standards of the military field guide to the CIA. The field guide iterates every form of interrogation techniques that can be used in a public document. There is absolutely nothing wrong with his vote and it is completely consistent with his views on torture. Read what he had to say.
http://mccain.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressOffice.PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=1863d120-d46b-b3f4-335c-bad46c47b725
“”"
U.S. Senator John McCain (R-AZ) today submitted for the Congressional Record the following statement regarding the Conference Report to accompany H.R. 2082, the Intelligence Authorization bill:
Mr. President, I oppose passage of the Intelligence Authorization Conference Report in its current form.
During conference proceedings, conferees voted by a narrow margin to include a provision that would apply the Army Field Manual to the interrogation activities of the Central Intelligence Agency. The sponsors of that provision have stated that their goal is to ensure that detainees under American control are not subject to torture. I strongly share this goal, and believe that only by ensuring that the United States adheres to our international obligations and our deepest values can we maintain the moral credibility that is our greatest asset in the war on terror.
That is why I fought for passage of the Detainee Treatment Act (DTA), which applied the Army Field Manual on interrogation to all military detainees and barred cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment of any detainee held by any agency. In 2006, I insisted that the Military Commissions Act (MCA) preserve the undiluted protections of Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions for our personnel in the field. And I have expressed repeatedly my view that the controversial technique known as “waterboarding” constitutes nothing less than illegal torture.
Throughout these debates, I have said that it was not my intent to eliminate the CIA interrogation program, but rather to ensure that the techniques it employs are humane and do not include such extreme techniques as waterboarding. I said on the Senate floor during the debate over the Military Commissions Act, “Let me state this flatly: it was never our purpose to prevent the CIA from detaining and interrogating terrorists. On the contrary, it is important to the war on terror that the CIA have the ability to do so. At the same time, the CIA’s interrogation program has to abide by the rules, including the standards of the Detainee Treatment Act.” This remains my view today.
When, in 2005, the Congress voted to apply the Field Manual to the Department of Defense, it deliberately excluded the CIA. The Field Manual, a public document written for military use, is not always directly translatable to use by intelligence officers. In view of this, the legislation allowed the CIA to retain the capacity to employ alternative interrogation techniques. I’d emphasize that the DTA permits the CIA to use different techniques than the military employs, but that it is not intended to permit the CIA to use unduly coercive techniques – indeed, the same act prohibits the use of any cruel, inhumane, or degrading treatment.
Similarly, as I stated after passage of the Military Commissions Act in 2006, nothing contained in that bill would require the closure of the CIA’s detainee program; the only requirement was that any such program be in accordance with law and our treaty obligations, including Geneva Common Article 3.
The conference report would go beyond any of the recent laws that I just mentioned – laws that were extensively debated and considered – by bringing the CIA under the Army Field Manual, extinguishing thereby the ability of that agency to employ any interrogation technique beyond those publicly listed and formulated for military use. I cannot support such a step because I have not been convinced that the Congress erred by deliberately excluding the CIA. I believe that our energies are better directed at ensuring that all techniques, whether used by the military or the CIA, are in full compliance with our international obligations and in accordance with our deepest values. What we need is not to tie the CIA to the Army Field Manual, but rather to have a good faith interpretation of the statutes that guide what is permissible in the CIA program.
This necessarily brings us to the question of waterboarding. Administration officials have stated in recent days that this technique is no longer in use, but they have declined to say that it is illegal under current law. I believe that it is clearly illegal and that we should publicly recognize this fact.
In assessing the legality of waterboarding, the Administration has chosen to apply a “shocks the conscience” analysis to its interpretation of the DTA. I stated during the passage of that law that a fair reading of the prohibition on cruel, inhumane, and degrading treatment outlaws waterboarding and other extreme techniques. It is, or should be, beyond dispute that waterboarding “shocks the conscience.”
It is also incontestable that waterboarding is outlawed by the Military Commissions Act, and it was the clear intent of Congress to prohibit the practice. The MCA enumerates grave breaches of Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions that constitute offenses under the War Crimes Act. Among these is an explicit prohibition on acts that inflict “serious and non-transitory mental harm,” which the MCA states “need not be prolonged.” Staging a mock execution by inducing the misperception of drowning is a clear violation of this standard. Indeed, during the negotiations, we were personally assured by Administration officials that this language, which applies to all agencies of the U.S. Government, prohibited waterboarding.
It is unfortunate that the reluctance of officials to stand by this straightforward conclusion has produced in the Congress such frustration that we are today debating whether to apply a military field manual to non-military intelligence activities. It would be far better, I believe, for the Administration to state forthrightly what is clear in current law – that anyone who engages in waterboarding, on behalf of any U.S. government agency, puts himself at risk of criminal prosecution and civil liability.
We have come a long way in the fight against violent extremists, and the road to victory will be longer still. I support a robust offensive to wage and prevail in this struggle. But as we confront those committed to our destruction, it is vital that we never forget that we are, first and foremost, Americans. The laws and values that have built our nation are a source of strength, not weakness, and we will win the war on terror not in spite of devotion to our cherished values, but because we have held fast to them.
“”"
“”"
like hoillering nonsequitors about how Obama lacks substance?
“”"
You’ve got room to talk meh… now go watch yuo sum faux news. Ye might learns sumpton.

so, pirate, what you’re trying to sell to us is that mccain is appealing to the bush pro-torture conservatives by keeping the vagueness of the law as it applies to the cia while at the same time declaring that waterboarding is torture.
this is exactly why some in the justice department cannot claim that such methods of torture are illegal… this gray area.
he’s also saying that legal restrictions applied to our military on the frontline of war somehow shouldn’t apply to the guys in suits.
if he feels so strongly anti-torture, he should vote that way and be clear about what is and what is not torture.