that left/right, donkey/elephant, dem/rep stuff is driving me nuts. you have to make a choice between 2 people who are almost thesame. they need to stay close to the middle to grab the undecided voters. the voters to the left or right will have their vote anyway.

in the netherlands we have a lot of political parties (like 15 real options). this means a coalition of multiple parties has to be made. this way a balanced system will be set in place instead of electing your dictator every 4 years. this also makes it possible to switch parties without having a big impact on the general course.

too bad ron paul is out of the race. now the republicans have to elect some weird, alienated, hypocritical and paranoid madman.. again..

if anyone could explain the unconditional support for israel from both parties i would be really grateful, because i really don’t get it (especially the unconditional part).

too bad we (the dutch) now have harrie potter as president instead of pim fortuyn :(

#2: It’s not an unhealthy obsession with Israel. It is calculated pandering. This is perhaps just as bad but not the same thing. There are groups within the United States which have connected weak or incomplete support for Israel with anti-semitism, which is ridiculous, but that’s what they’re pre-emptively addressing.

In Palin’s case, she probably felt the need to offset her weirdo Pentecostalism. American evangelicals tend to go to either of one of two extremes in regard to Israel. She was being demonstrative of which side she was on. But even most of the pro-Israel evangelicals are only pro-Israel because of biblical prophecy, and a future in which Jews are all converted to Christianity.

Likewise some on the Left are not great fans of Israel’s policies re: the West Bank and Gaza, and so Biden went out of his way to announce that he wasn’t one of those.

The way politicians grovel this way is pretty embarrassing, frankly. The pro-Israel lobby in the United States is quite powerful, and can buy a lot of media time. Unfortunately, “Israel” gets confused with “Jews” and so everyone is really afraid of appearing anti-semitic (or being called that).

Palin is worse than a barbie girl. What’s more problematic is that she is representative of the kind of pervasive, consumerist middle class mediocrity which has too long defined this country. With really off-the-edge religious fervor thrown in.

Unfortunately, a fair number of Americans think they’re looking in a mirror when they see Sarah Palin; they recognize her type as one of their own. This is the whole problem.

They both basically said that civil unions should have the same rights and privileges as marriages, and that’s pretty much what most people have been asking for.

There’s no reason at all to create special names and extra paperwork. We shouldn’t cave in to personal religious beliefs (they’re not universal, just about every Christian that I know personally does NOT oppose gay marriage at all) - the moment we do, there’s no longer a clear separation between church and state.

Religion should be confined to one’s personal life, and shouldn’t be forced upon others - or, what some atheists do, “unforced” upon others.

Thom —> Barbie Boy.

‘nuf said.

Or, *I* am secure enough concerning my sexual orientation that I am not afraid to stand up for my fellow (homosexual) man and woman.

Both tickets (yes, including Obama) oppose gay marriage, and therefore contradict the Founding Fathers by blatantly promoting inequality.”

There’s nothing in the Constitution that states how marriage should be defined, and there shouldn’t be (there should be a clear line between church and state). They both basically said that civil unions should have the same rights and privileges as marriages, and that’s pretty much what most people have been asking for.

‘nuf said.