The Smear Gap

Barry. I am glad you chose Hillary. The two of you will unify the party. Good job.

Insulted the French - In an interview with Fox News, McCain aimed his ill-fated humor at our allies, the French. "You know," he began, "the French remind me a little bit of an aging actress of the 1940s who is still trying to dine out on her looks but doesn't have the face for it." This is a country that is heavily involved in the Afghan conflict- in particular, they're training Afghan soldiers to reduce the burden on the US military. McCain's questionable comments raised a measured ruckus in both foreign and domestic circles, calling the Senator's diplomatic skills into question.

It is without question that foreign policy blunders are John Mccain's strong point of consistency

Oh, BTW - Talk about smears: Obama jumped all over the fact that McCain couldn't recall how many properties he owned. Talk about calling the kettle black:

Barack Obama knows a lot about housing problems. One of his 'biggest fundraisers' helped him buy his million-dollar mansion. Purchasing part of the property he couldn't afford. From Obama, Rezko got 'political favors' including $14 million from taxpayers. Now, he's a convicted felon, facing jail. That's a housing problem.

We have to be honest right now. We can say all this crap, but nobody is going to vote for Obama and that is that. He is not one of us. People can call me names all they want, but they know deep down inside, I am right............Just the thought of Obama in the white house would have the grand wizard sick to his stomach.

Obama can connect with voters on the economy by using history as a guideline. He should start by reading "Unequal Democracy," by Princeton academic Larry Bartels. The non-partisan and non-political Bartels points out devastatingly after an exhaustive study of Democratic and Republican presidents that the Democrats built a better economy and a more just society. From CNN

The campaign needs to say that, since 1900, Democratic presidents have not only "won" but dominated on every economic front: GDP growth, employment, deficit and income equality. Need more? How about a better performing stock market and a more fiscally-responsible spending.

A detailed analysis of the candidates' tax plans confirms one of Barack Obama's top arguments against John McCain: the Arizona senator's proposals would offer substantial benefits to wealthy Americans.

An analysis of both campaigns proposals by the Washington-based, nonpartisan Tax Policy Center found that for people with incomes between $66,354 and $111,645, Obama's proposals would cut their taxes by more than $1000, compared to around $300 under McCain's plan. But for Americans with incomes above $603,402, Obama would raise their taxes dramatically, by more than $115,000 a year, while McCain would cut them by $45,000.

Families/individuals making more than six figures certainly may be concerned about their family budgets, but those who are at the breaking point -- those on the brink of ???economic disaster??? -- are not those making six- or seven-figure salaries.

In that upper echelon, those making an average of $2.9 million -- the top 0.1% -- would get a whopping tax break of $269,000 from McCain. Under Obama???s plan, the millionaires would take a serious hit, their pockets lightened by $702,000 on average. For those making $2.9 million-plus a year, perhaps that would constitute an ???economic disaster,??? but then the image in the ad should probably be of an anguished CEO clutching his Mercedes key chain not a middle-class mother clutching her child.

If you are a middle class person working hard to take care of your family, you better choice is Obama. If you are in the upper class and you are worried about your Bently or BMW, or your houses no matter how many you have. Maybe you have 7 houses and you wear 500 dollar shoes, then your choice is McCain.

i am not here to say what Obama did or McCain did. i am here to tell the truth. i am a proud white american who knows i will not vote for Obama. I will not vote for him because Obama is not my cup of tea. he would never understand the white race. white america will never trust Obama, no matter how much they fall into the bradley effect.

The name Bradley effect is derived from a 1982 campaign involving Tom Bradley, the long-time mayor of Los Angeles, California. Bradley, who was black, ran as the Democratic party's candidate for Governor of California against Republican candidate George Deukmejian, who was white. The polls on the final days before the election consistently showed Bradley with a lead.[5] In fact, based on exit polls on election day, a number of media outlets projected a Bradley win that night; early editions of the next day's San Francisco Chronicle featured a headline proclaiming "BRADLEY WIN PROJECTED". However, Bradley narrowly lost the race. Post-election research indicated that a smaller percentage of white voters actually voted for Bradley than polls had predicted, and that voters who had been classified by those polls as "undecided" had gone to Deukmejian in statistically anomalous numbers.[3]

One month prior to the election, Bill Roberts, Deukmejian's campaign manager at that time, had predicted this behavior. He told reporters that he expected that Deukmejian could advance approximately five percentage points from what his poll numbers indicated, due to white voters giving inaccurate polling responses in order to conceal an appearance of racial prejudice. Roberts's comments were disavowed by Deukmejian, and the controversy that surrounded them ultimately led to Roberts's resignation.[6]

Similar voter behavior was noted in the 1989 race for Governor of Virginia between black Democratic candidate L. Douglas Wilder (right) and white Republican candidate Marshall Coleman. In that race, Wilder prevailed, but by less than half of one percent, despite pre-election poll numbers that showed an average lead for him of nearly nine percent.[7][8] Again, the discrepancy was widely attributed to white voters who had told pollsters that they backed Wilder, but who did not actually vote for him.[9] As a result of this race, some re-christened the "Bradley effect" as the "Wilder effect".[10][11] Both terms are still used, each referring to the same dynamic, and less commonly, the term "Dinkins effect" is also used,[4] in reference to 1989 election of David Dinkins as Mayor of New York City over Rudy Giuliani.

Just found out that spirited away and holy roller are the same. That tells me they are kids.

McCain is not the same McCain as the man who headed
the straight talk express. That train has definately left
the tracks.
I can not say how deeply dissappointed I am at McCains
outright lies about Obama.

To think during the last election I broke my back for
a man who now has sunk so low.

John...you are a BIG DISSAPPOINTMENT!