"(who is supposedly "not tainted" the way other politicians are)"
Who's assuming that? Pretty ridiculous assumption, wouldn't you say?
"I see - so any time a politician flip-flops, we shouldn't talk about it- because chances are, the other guy does it too"
No...my point was it's stupid for one side to attack the other candidate when the first side's candidate is weaker in that area. Any mention by the right of Obama's changes will invariably invoke many, many more by McCain, and on core issues: Tax cuts for the rich, torture, the religious right, etc. It's a foolish political tactic. I doubt anyone will truly give a fuck how Obama voted in the Illinois legislature on a coal project compared to McCain's belief we should be borrowing billions of dollars every year to eliminate a tax that only effects multi-millionaires and billionaires.
"I noticed you still couldn't defend Obama in your post without bringing up McCain - twice. Sad and predictable"
I noticed you missed my point completely, which is why I've had to repeat it. Sad and predictable.
But, since I'm supposed to "defend Obama" (I guess) what am I defending him from, false suggestions he's the Savior? That he's perfect? Screw that, I have no illusions. He's a politician, but he's one who will get the worst governance of my life out of power versus the one who will continue it. And he's the one who will assure Scalia isn't the intellectual thrust of our laws for the next generation or more versus the one who has vowed to put more Scalias on the bench.
Obama also represents, to me, a turning of the page needed by America in many ways. We had the Greatest Generation who did fine (except for fixing Social Security during a time of rising birth rates), and now the Greediest Generation, and they bollixed it badly. McCain (and Hillary) both still represent that Vietnam era to me. Still, I was initially considering McCain (and Guiliani on the R side), but that died with his abandoning his "maverick" positions, especially tax cuts for the rich and embracing the Falwells of the world. Obama, while full of mistakes, flip-flops, and a secret Muslim past, is brilliant, well-educated, and seemingly willing to get America back on a track where, say, science is respected instead of censored. He's an excellent orator, charismatic, and could possibly inspire a generation of Americans to tackle the massive problems ahead of us as the baby boomers retire and age. And Obama's history also shows he's walked the walk, taking a low-paying job ($13,000, in Chicago) after being an editor (the first black) of the Harvard Law Review. . And he stayed for years. I'm betting he could have made more, wouldn't you say?
As far as other Dem policies, I've never been a big fan of many---too fiscally irresponsible, too overreaching, and I'm still pissed about the Dems in Congress campaigning on paygo and clean bills, neither of which they delivered. Of course, I'm more pissed at the Republicans, for abandoning their policies of fiscal sanity and individual freedoms in the first place, and possibly sticking us with Dem majorities everywhere.
Oh, and one other aspect: the presidency requires all the faculties to be firing on all cylinders. It ages every man who holds the position, and quickly. I don't want to be electing a Vice-President.
I'd say that answers your question(s). Your turn: whom are you voting for, and why?
