Who wanted to go to Iraq? Who voted with Bush 90%+ of the time? Who’s economic adviser said the recession was just psychological and that Americans are a bunch of whiners?
*Hint: It wasn’t Obama

The real question is how many times would Obama have voted with Lenin?
(Sorry couldn’t resist it.)

The earth is the Lord’s and the fullness thereof.
There are plenty of reasons to reject central planning of our economic lives, and a few reasons to look at central planning making them easier. But the distinction that is important, to me at least, isn’t the dated Marxist vs capitalist but materialist vs spiritual.

It must be nice to be a right winger. You get to use words Red Queen style- words mean just what you want them to mean. Words like Marxist. Which, by any sane definition, does not fit any Democrat in America that I have met or even heard of.
Either that, or they are simply ignorant, and proud of it.
Just to name one subject out of many. If McSame actually keeps the Bush tax cuts, this nation will be bankrupt in short order. Already the right wing has put us near the edge.
If you want the nation to be officially broke, elect McSame. You will get it.

this coming from the lady who supports the bush administration and from the ultra-conservative editorial staff of the ibd. like that’s not a slanted view of the world there.
if the country believed your labels of obama, i wonder what would make them distrust mccain nearly as much as a marxist?
oh, brother.

If anything, the margin of riskiness has less to do with Obama being a “Marxist” and more to do with the fact that people still believe the whole bullshit about experience being the most qualifying position of being president. I mean really, how much experience is enough experience? McCain has more experience than Obama and even George W. Bush, but in the end, he just sounds like the third coming of George W. Bush. I think we need someone different, even if that means someone who is less experienced. Experience does not always mean a better candidate. If anything else, people are more worried about Obama because he has a name that is not, as my grandparents would call it, an American-sounding name. Experience and racism, those are probably the two biggest factors. And in reality, it’s not that great of a margin.
Also, any intelligent, or at least informed person would know that calling Obama a Marxist is a childish thing that rarely has any merit whatsoever and that Republicans have been using that word for years to decry anyone who isn’t a 100% for the free market (and if you’ve ever read books like Capitalism is Freedom by Milton Friedman or truly understood what it meant to live by a truly free market philosophy, I think you would understand why people aren’t always gung ho about the capitalist system).

If anything, the margin of riskiness has less to do with Obama being a “Marxist” and more to do with the fact that people still believe the whole bullshit about experience being the most qualifying position of being president. I mean really, how much experience is enough experience? McCain has more experience than Obama and even George W. Bush, but in the end, he just sounds like the third coming of George W. Bush. I think we need someone different, even if that means someone who is less experienced. Experience does not always mean a better candidate. If anything else, people are more worried about Obama because he has a name that is not, as my grandparents would call it, an American-sounding name. Experience and racism, those are probably the two biggest factors. And in reality, it’s not that great of a margin.
Also, any intelligent, or at least informed person would know that calling Obama a Marxist is a childish thing that rarely has any merit whatsoever and that Republicans have been using that word for years to decry anyone who isn’t a 100% for the free market (and if you’ve ever read books like Capitalism is Freedom by Milton Friedman or truly understood what it meant to live by a truly free market philosophy, I think you would understand why people aren’t always gung ho about the capitalist system).

With Senator Obama, we will get a significant change from the way our country is currently being run. With Senator McCain, we won’t.
With Senator McCain, our slouching towards a militaristic, paranoid, permanently-terrified country will continue. That may not be risky, but will be disastrous for the concept of America as a shining beacon of liberty and freedom.
But that’s OK, because Senator McCain’s not all that “risky”.

Here you go …
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/21129038/full_metal_mccain/
and
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/21896154/without_a_prayer/
via Commonweal blog

I think you need to scrutinize your sources. The marxist smear was debunked a while ago.
If Obama is a marxist then McCain is a fascist. There is about as much evidence for each claim.
I think McCain is the riskier choice because he doesn’t seem to remember what he said the previous day. He looks like he is either lying or having senior moments.

I agree that folks using “Marxist” suffer from a tragic form of mental retardation. That’s like calling China a “communist” country when they’ve got Hong Kong and Beijing, two huge bastions of capitalism.
There have been authoritarian technocratic states, but there never has been a country that could transition to the Marxist model. Never! Period!
Obama is not even in favor of single payer health care; so, I think that those throwing labels around need to go back to school or shut the hell up.
If Republicans wanna keep talking like McCarthy, they’re only gonna distract from the war on terror, their other baby. By the way, whatever happened to wanting to get bin Laden? I’m even in favor of that.

If you read Obama’s own writings, you will find he has supported Marxist such as William Ayers! He also admired Rev. Wright and others he has now ditched for political convenience. Birds of a feather do flock together. I’d rather support someone who has flocked with those who have defended the USA. By the way, I know elderly people who remember how the crowds cheered Hitler in Germany before they realized what he was up to. We need to wake up before it is too late.

Actually, this country is practicing socialism for…….
-the rich, and in a big way. Our government commonly bails out companies that are too big to fail, or in trouble, especially if they have given lots of campaign contributions.
They commonly socialize the losses, and keep the profits. Nice work if you can get it, and you can get it – if you bribe.
Lobster salad socialism is costing this country dearly, and no rightie ever says a word about it.
One example- Wal Mart pays its employees so little they often hand out applications for state run health insurance. So the taxpayers subsidize this very profitable company. When companies pollute, guess who gets the tab most often?
But nobody in the ‘liberal’ media gets paid to churn this story…

“The marxist smear was debunked a while ago.”
So? What does the truth have to do with a conservative (‘reformed’ “Christian”, no less!) babbling chick’s right-wing blog?

The complete lack of real content that this post has just completely vindicates the idea of this blog just a place to post a lot of “blabbing.”

Michelle, how very Un-Christian of you to resort to name calling! You better go to confession… Oh I forgot you don’t believe in that, your reformed and chosen and of the elect.
By the way, the people who called themselves “The Way”, the Judean Christians of the first century, believe in having all things in common with no personal ownership. That sound like communism to me. What do you say to that? (Read Acts 4:32-37)

moonshadow, interesting read on the mccain-180 (not to mention the reminder that the politics of fear is alive and well). thanks.
point taken.

“… the Bush-Cheney ticket — a high-tech engine of ruthless neocon capitalism wedded to a half-literate aristocrat dunce hiding his alcoholism in born-again Christian platitudes. Add corporate money to fundamentalist-Christian demographics in a country as dumb and superstitious as America, and you can vaporize a century’s worth of Al Gores and John Kerrys.”

McCain is, to me, riskier than Obama. First because of his character – I fear McCain is too unpredictable and might lose his temper and start WWIII.
Secondly, I feel that McCain is past his prime. He certainly, in my book, would have been a better President than Bush if he had been elected in 2000. (For that matter, McCain would probably not have gone along with stealing the election from Al Gore.)
I think with Obama we risk having a mediocrity as President. We’ve had that before, and I think we could survive that.

alicia, couldn’t agree with you more here. i actually liked and respected the mccain of the past. a lot has changed in the past decade…