There is something about this man Obama that makes supporters do just that, get off their sofas and do something. Anything for change and calls from a trusted man. Anti-Obama folks haven't quite figured out what is going on but most Obama supporters get it. He is a rare candidate and man who does offer hope for change in the life he has led, the consistent record he has, an the ability to verbalize in a no-nonsense way pure logic. The very thing that he ran on is what all the other candidates tried desperately to pretend they were when they saw what a powerful message of change Obama brought and how supporters reacted. That Obama drew 75,000 people to one rally is not a quirk.

<link>

More often we hear those supporting other candidates asking "But where is he on issues?" while scratching their heads - "But where is the experience?", but how is he going to fix the economy?" and on and on. Each question has an answer that Obama supporters repeatedly repeat. His record and stances are as clear as McCain's but those who support McCain don't bother checking to see exactly where the differences are and where each stands. I dare to say many don't even know where McCain stands in terms of his history let alone Obama. It is a fairly simple thing to do. If you don't know, find out. Use your search engines for something other than finding false attacks.

If anyone doesn't understand exactly what is going on do the homework. Here is a starting point that may help but check both candidates for comparison. The stances are similar with every candidate. What is different is one candidate started the drumbeat for change so it doesn't matter whether McCain is now trying to be Obama, he came into it too late to utilize his art of morphing no matter how he is trying currently. Call McCain Obama-lite at this stage. Change means something else when talking about how many people McCain imitates.

I just know you will have fun with this post. On this fine Monday morning it is good to get the adrenaline flowing.

Obama link for abortion issue record but you can find the each individual issue as well. Compare to McCain's voting record. You may not agree with either one of them but at least you will know what charge is accurate and what is false accusations:

<link>

"More often we hear those supporting other candidates asking "But where is he on issues?" while scratching their heads - "But where is the experience?", but how is he going to fix the economy?" and on and on. Each question has an answer that Obama supporters repeatedly repeat."

Would you be so kind as to repeat them here (in detail) for all of us who only see an empty suit with a scripted message (that changes with every different audience he is in front of)?

Sure. Don't mind at all. Click the link I gave in the original post and start with reading the voting records of each candidate. On the top you can pick any issue and see the record.

Here is another site that may help you with candidate comparisons:

<link>

There are many legitimate sites that can give you more information. I'd avoid blogs discussing flags, muslim, and pledges and opt for reality in their voting records.

You honestly think that neocons like redwhite%blue are interested in reality?

They make their own reality, remember?

If you understood where Hillary stood on the issues, then you understand with Obama stands, with a couple of exceptions;

1.Health care, she wanted it mandated, Obama does not. Under her plan if you don't pay, your salary can be garnished for payment. Under his plan, if you don't pay, and you get sick and need care, you must pay all back preminums.

2. Foreign policy, the only difference is in talking with enemies, Obama believes in it without preconditions (but with prior preparation), Clinton believes in it only with preconditions (they must agree to something we ask before we will meet with them).

3. Gasoline tax break for the summer, Clinton supported it, Obama (and most economists) didn't.

4. Social Security, Obama wants to eliminate taxes on social security for retirees who have less than $50,00 in annual income, Clinton doesn't (but you have to remember that it was her husband's administration that put the tax on social security benefits).

Those are the basics. I think I covered most, but others will jump in if I missed something.

Basically, their stance on the issues were the same.

The race was really close. There is one issue that you did not touch on...Iraq...which I believe was the margin of separation when all was said and done. This sexism canard is just that. While there was no question that some existed it was easily balanced by the race issue for Obama. The activist/left wing of the party (led by MoveOn.org et al) who were rabidly anti-Iraq and prevailed in the caucuses made Hillary pay the price for a) supporting the war resolution b) not apologizing for her vote as did Edwards.

Polmanic

Very true.

"You honestly think that neocons like redwhite%blue are interested in reality?

They make their own reality, remember?"

LOL! That is some funny .... seems like when it comes to reality (a junior senator with no experience and a radical background) I am one of the few who really gets it. If you pulled yourselves away from the No Barack Criticism channel or the two hacks on MSNBC you might start to see what reality truly is...but then again, Olberman and Mathews are creating your reality for you.

Well, it's appropriate to keep the discussion focused on Barack Obama. That's the message from conservative Bay Buchanan: <link>

"... the mother of all primaries has done her job reducing the field to two. But in reality there is only one candidate. Barack Obama. In November he will win or he will lose.

John McCain is relevant only in so far as he is not Barack Obama. The Senator from Arizona is incapable of energizing his party, brings no new people to the polls, and has a personality that is best kept under wraps."

Now that is funny. Well, it's funny if you're not a McCain supporter.

redwhite&blue:

LOL! That is some funny .... seems like when it comes to reality (a junior senator with no experience and a radical background)...

Radical background - care to back that up?

Harvard Law School, well known hotbed of radicalism.

University of Chicago Law School, ditto.

Furthermore, Barack Obama is a scholar of that deeply subversive and radical document, The Constitution of the United States of America.

I bet he worships that hippy Jesus Christ too.

I heard JC grew up in the middle east, better check out his associates.

Well said my dear pwoxby: The only things you left out were his father, However in his defense, we can choose our friends, but we can not choose our family. Yet it does leave one to wonder, if push comes to shove; is blood really thicker than water? Then there were those embarrassing moments while he was a State Senator. You know like when he showed his true feelings about the 2nd Amendment and voted to ban handguns for self-defense used by biding citizens in their own homes. Hey it failed but you've got to give him an "F" for his attempt to screw his citizens. Then there was the two times he had a chance to get tough on crime in his state and vote to bring juvenile gang members to trial as adults for felony crimes. He had another chance to right a wrong when his state tried to pass a law allowing the death penalty to be considered for a juvenile gang member who comitt murder. In both these instances he show his true colors and voted against being tough on crime. What do you think the person he would appoint as Attorney General would do? Face the facts that Obama is "LIBERAL" even by Democrat standards. Bill Clinton another liberal Democrat had a chance to take action no less than 4 times when America was attacked by terrorists and each time choose to do NOTHING! I can not help but believe that had he take strong decisive action there is a good possibility that the twin towers would still be standing. Bill Clinton was tough compared to Obama. Do we really want to just cut and run and wait and see if the terrorists will by some miracle be our friends or at least leave us alone? That is a very big gamble and the stakes are extremely high in terms of lives that will be lost and economic cost if he is wrong. If you want to vote for the best used car salesman, then by all means vote for Obama. If you want a person who can put you in the car that is right for you at payments you can afford, vote for McCain. Whichever you do, look past the smoke and mirrors that both use and see what they really stand for. I don't think you'll like what you see in Obama.

blueshift:

I bet he worships that hippy Jesus Christ too.

I heard JC grew up in the middle east, better check out his associates.

He hung out with tax collectors, prostitutes, and leppers. Plus he had long hair and talk about really subversive stuff like rich people should give their possessions to the poor. Definitely unamerican.

BTW, Chris Matthews is a complete tool. But whatever stereotypes make you feel better, RW%B.

@ nyecop:

Barack Obama is liberal? You're sure about that? I'll alert the media!

As for the twin towers, do you really want to go there? On 2001 August 6 George W. Bush's daily briefing contained a memo titled "Bin Laden determined to strike within the US." With a keen sense of where his priorities lay, Bush ignored the memo and went back to the important work of clearing scrub bush on his "ranch". By the time Bush's vacation was over, it was too late to take action.

This mantra that conservatives are serious about terrorism is a smokescreen to cover up Bush's monumental negligence and incompetence. As for Iraq, just add stupidity and ignorance to negligence and incompetence. That, in a nutshell, defines the GOP.