Also, read (or re-read if you’ve already seen it) the entire text of his speech on the faith-based initiative. Certainly here in the South, and even more so in the cities, churches can be very constructive partners. Obama minced no words on the Constitutional separation of church and state or on the fact that any government funded activites must be strictly secular, and that there can be no discrimination in any hiring with federal money. One can debate whether or not Southern Baptists can be trusted to adhere to the guidelines, but that is a different issue. But such partnerships can be a godsend for the inner cities.

I can understand being upset with his pandering to AIPAC. That I thought was pandering, but AIPAC currently owns the US portfolio for the Middle East, and Florida goes through AIPAC. But Obama has made very clear his commitment to negotiations, and Iran is more than willing and ready to negotiate with anyone not committed up front to bombing them and/or overthrowing their government. And they are not going to attack Israel unless they are attacked, so there is no plausible need to “protect Israel from Iran.” The reverse, on the other hand…and it might involve Russia and China. Not pretty.

On Obama’s promise to have his attorney general review every executive order for its constitutionality, that will happen, especially since I expect John Edwards to be the next attorney general, and because Barack Obama probably already knows which ones are unconstitutional. That was not an idle promise.

Do not despair, Steve. Obama has too much of what we value going for him and in his makeup for him to morph into a Cheney/Bush or McCain, and he does not suffer from LBJ’s Texas anti-communist foreign policy disorder, or its modern incarnation. And as I have had to remind myself, he is running for President of the United States, unlike GWB, who has been exclusively Crony President for $pecial Interests and Religious Extremists, the mantle John the Phoney Maverick McCain is clearly committed to assuming if he can.

Steve, good luck making your choice between Obama and McCain.

It’s not so much a choice any longer but rather just being back in a position of holding my nose while in the polling booth.

Perhaps I’m just a victim of my own delusional optimism after living through these past seven and some odd long, ugly, depressing years but I hoped for better from Obama. When he said that one of his first acts as President would be to sit down with his Attorney General and go through all the Bush Administration’s Executive Orders and toss out the ones which are unconstitutional, I damned near danced on a table.

Now, I’m guessing that the meeting will be rather short.

Yeah, I’ll vote for Obama but only because the alternative is so much more vile. Not because I expect anything much better.

Senator Barry Goldwater once famously ran for President as “a choice, not an echo” and while I disagreed with most of what Goldwater had to say, it was a nice turn of phrase and I always hoped that my party would someday take that spirit up as its own banner.

What’s the matter with perhaps a little “audacity of hope”?

1. Has the candidate ever been censured for conflict of interest and been caught up in a fraud scheme? McCain - 1; Obama - 0.

2. Has the candidate ever abandoned his wife after she had a disfiguring automobile accident and no longer resembled a beauty queen. McCain - 1; Obama - 0.

3. Has the candidate ever cheated on his wife before divorcing her because she no longer looked like a beauty queen? McCain - 1; Obama - 0.

4. Has the candidate ever changed his position on an issue in order to pander to a particular group of voters? McCain - 345,601; Obama - 1.5.

5. Has the candidate confused Shia with Sunni or Al Qeada with “extremist groups” from Iran? McCain - 53; Obama - 0.

6. Has he confused them this year? McCain - 49; Obama - 0.

There are many other questions you can use in place of these. It certainly appears that McCain has an impressive and commanding lead so far! I hope this helps you with your decision.

Jake

I don’t like Obama’s vote, but I understand it. You will be able to judge him on this issue once he is president. We understand the issue.

I guess you have to start wondering who really is running for a Bush third term now.

I had hopes for Senator Obama at the start of all of this but it’s beginning to look and sound as if we’re in for another four years of “compassionate conservatism”, no matter how the election turns out.

What with Senator Obama pandering to the religious conservatives with his proposal to escalate “faith-based” programs or pandering to the social conservatives by going all Bill Cosby this last Fathers Day, it’s beginning to look as if we have virtually no choice between McCain and Obama other than skin tone.

One begins to suspect the only reason why Senator Obama didn’t vote for the Iraq war was because he wasn’t in the Senate at the time.

Maybe he’ll pick Joe Lieberman for his running mate and complete the package.

Video: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/06/30/olbermann-special-comment_n_1 10114.html

It’s a little long (almost 12 mins), but worth watching. Part of his point is similar to one David made — Obama has/had to vote “yes” in order not to alienate a less-informed portion of the voting public.

Olbermann also points out a loophole in the telecom immunity portion of the bill — it offers them civil immunity, not criminal. Therefore, Obama could (and did) vote “yes” to the whole thing now, and later go after the telecoms on criminal charges at a time when he is (I hope) president or (frighteningly) doesn’t have to worry about votes for a few more years.

Of course Olbermann says it better, I was just giving a preview to entice you to watch it

The overriding philosophical issue for me is that when anyone or any entity violates the law at the behest of the leader, you are on the way to a tyranny. We aren’t there yet, but we have some of the ingredients and some trends which must be reversed. But it is the leader which must go, and must be replaced by a leader who respects the constitution and the rule of law on behalf of a population which grasps these basic principles.

Other major problem - now AP has endorsed and is shilling for McCain. AP is a wire service, a source of news for the news outlets. This is beyond insidious.

PITTSBURGH (Reuters) - Presidential candidate John McCain, on Tuesday reacted to a report of rising U.S. cigarette exports to the country by saying it may be “a way of killing ‘em.”

McCain, was responding to a report that U.S. exports to Iran rose tenfold during President George W. Bush’s term in office despite hostility between the two states.

A rise in cigarette sales was a big part of that, according to an Associated Press analysis of seven years of U.S. trade figures.

“Maybe that’s a way of killing ‘em,” McCain said to reporters during a campaign stop in Pittsburgh.

I tell you, they’re just not paying me enough. Not only do I explain the “dismal science” to McCain and the campaign staff, I do so without putting them to sleep (mainly by making it up on the fly and by throwing in a few one-liners from Georgie Jessell’s Joke Book from the mid-fifties “Low-Dive Tour”. The old guys just love it and remember, if you’re laughing, you ain’t sleeping!)

Anyway, now they got me writing a couple of new jokes for the candidate everyday. So, how did you like the death to the Iranians joke about the cigarettes? Huh? It kills, right? Cindy McCain was standing right behind John when he made the crack about the cigarettes/Iranians and I got to tell you, he’s lucky she wasn’t holding an icepick at the time. She gave him such a shot - a knuckle to the L5-S1 vertebra - that he damn near fell onto the elderly and crippled extras I’d hired for the day and had lined up on the front row. Now we’ve got to run all the jokes by Cindy first. What a buzz-kill. I’ll have to compensate for that bad news by hacking the system and doubling my salary again.

You know what? I feel better already.

It’s an interesting case of the logical fallacy called Poisoning the Well.

Usually people try to poison the well against their opponents by pointing out negative things about them. But what opponents want to say about Obama is: “His biggest flaw is that he gives fabulous speeches. Remember, the more you like what he says, the more you need to reject him as a candidate.”

Hope you, Tammy and Tony are settled somewhat in the new home. If it’s any consolation, we moved into the house here 20 years ago and I still have boxes to unpack. And I know I will, too….someday soon.