If Obama keeps running around saying that a vote for Bush is a vote for McCain, then the natural retort for McCain will be that he is no more Bush's guy than Obama is Wright's guy.

Watch, if being associated with Bush hurts McCain then Obama is going to be associated with Wright. Guilt by association burns both ways. I'm not saying this won't happen, but it shouldn't be coming out of the mouths of the principals or their representatives.

I hope that they take to the town hall policy debates they've said they'd do.

GWB is the sitting President and he is from the same political party as McCain.

Wright is only a pastor and thus he has NO power over any policy issues. GWB does of course.

So in any town hall debate it would be fair for Obama to question McCain on policy issues where McCain will continue with the failures of the GWB admin by following a policy very similar to GWB.

There is noting of substance I can see McCain asking Obama about that is assocaited with Wright.

It is the guilt by association thing. Though there may be a lot of similarities between Bush and McCain. McCain is sufficiently different that to say McCain is Bush's man is as valid as saying that Wrigth's liberation theology, which is inherently a politcal theology, is Obama's political beliefs.

I think Obama has to stop stumping with the phrase that, "A vote for McCain is a vote for Bush."

How different are McCain and Bush on Iran (and foreign policy in general)?

How different are McCain and Bush on taxes and the deficit?

So, in what way is a vote for McCain not a vote for more Bush?

There obviously are some similarities. They are in the same party after all.

I wonder what similarities Obama and Wright share?

The point isn't "guilt by association" it is. The argument is:

1) You just had 7+ years of W. Most of you don't seem to think it was much fun.

2) McCain and Bush are quite ideologically similar (I'll give McCain the not-inconsequential edge in competence).

3) Therefore, if you didn't like Bush, you probably don't want McCain.

You're comparing things that aren't equivalent.

But if I didn't like the politics I heard sitting in Wright's pews, why would I want 4 years of it in the form of Obama in the White House?

I think McCain could be vastly different than Bush. He won't be for torture. He will probably finally deal with illegal immigration in a fair way that a Democrat couldn't. He will probably stop sucking the hind teet of big business in comparison to Bush. Heck, pushed, I think McCain would be the Teddy Roosevelt to big business for this century.

With someone like Sen. Lindsey Graham as veep, we could get un-adulterated conservatism that was more interested in increasing the efficiency of govt. before bloating its budget with increased taxes (. I think a Republican president and a heavily Democratic congress would be my wet dream result from this election cycle. :0)

Obama has never said that Wright is or was a political adviser. In fact, he's said that Wright was never his political adviser. Obama has never defended Wright's politics.

McCain, on the other hand, has embraced the Bush Doctrine. McCain has changed positions to fall more in line with Bush (tax cuts and social security, just to name two). McCain has publicly agreed with many things Bush has said, and supported many of Bush's policies.

I don't think the McCain camp would want to risk drawing Wright/Bush comparisons. They stand to lose in every way.

If Obama keeps running around saying that a vote for Bush is a vote for McCain...

I wasn't aware that Bush was running again.

...then the natural retort for McCain will be that he is no more Bush's guy than Obama is Wright's guy.

Right, because Obama has come out in support of Wright's tax cuts and Iraq policies. Got it.

Thank you for the intelligent commentary.

Liberation theology is by nature political. Black liberation theology even more so.

To sit 20 years taking in this theology is to be absorbing a political view of the world.

I believe you know the difference and for political reasons just wish to believe the two are the same.

What you are trying to do here is 'sell' McCain as being some type of different member of the GOP.

GWB tried that this trick with his compassionate con gimmick. Unless McCain clearly says he does NOT support the policies and views of GWB (like Obama did with Wright), no one should trust that McCain represents a diffrerent version of the GOP that has failed this nation the last 7+ years.

As the WHO said 'don't get fooled again'!

You still don't get it do you. YES, McCain has a track record. This is why I do NOT support him.

Now I will agree that Obama is more of a RISK then McCain because Obama does NOT have much of a track record BUT I will take the risk associated with Obama over the track record of McCain and the GOP. Again that track record of the GOP has been 7+ years of total failure.

HEY, of course you can say I'm full of crap about the last 7 years, BUT, my point still stands; McCain is from the party that has given us these last 7+ years.

If one feels those 7+ years have been good ones than, YES, vote for the GOP! If NOT good years than do NOT vote for the GOP.

Obama has barely done anything that does not revolve around civil rights for blacks. As admirable as that is, it is a shallow experience pool.

I want McCain to win. I want a largely Democratic congress and if McCain dies I'd wish Colin Powell was VP.

I'm not interested in a man (Obama), who by all accounts, voted against legislation that would have protected a fetus that survived an attempted abortion and was actually born alive. I think it monstrous to carry abortion rights beyond the womb.