Don't agree to avoid "left and right wing" They are not meaningless at all . On the political spectrum of issues it is a continuim (sp) from left to right. You want to avoid having Obamas ideas (any one of them or all of them collectively) identified anywhere on this line when it shows he is a leftist. I did not misrepresent his postion on FISA....just said what he voted and how it was in the extreme minority with the leftists in his party. You can agree with him of you wish but you can't paint him as a centrist.....on this or almost any other meaningfull issue of the day. 68 Senators disagreed with him on this. 22 agreed. Hillary conveniently did not vote. You revert to Bush bashing when supporting Obama on FISA..... fact is the FISA will be of benefit to future presidents much longer than for Bush......he is nearly history. The battle with Islam will be on the next presidents plate, so forget Bush's limited time use of FISA. Ditto the Patriot Act which was passed with strong bi-partisan support before the left started attacking their members of Congress and asking for a re-do. The left wants to "kill" that to as Reed so infamously said. Next president and his administration needs that as well.

I think is just a matter of honesty to say that McCain is conservative or right wing on this or moderate on that......same with Obama. If he takes a moderate position then I will be happy to hear it described as that. It is just short hand to describe their positions vis a vis the opponent. I amuses me when liberals have a fit when someone calls them leftists or liberals when they prefer the euphemism of progressives. We republicans think our ideas are "progressive" in the sense that they advance progress in the nation. It is just another term that one party likes and the other belittles as a "label". We r's are proud to be called conservatives....we do not run from this "label". Oh, yea.... i forgot we don't understand the nuanced difference between liberal and progressive.

Earmarks and pork. Obama generated 90 million in earmarks for IL last year.....Hillary over 200 mil for NY. McCain ZERO for AZ. Last time we discussed this you were strongly against earmarks....if you still hold that view how do you reconcile it with supporting Obama (that was a rhetorical question). You are quick to point out sinful spending of the r's under Bush ( and I agree with you totally) but you are willing to believe the democrats are more fiscally responsible.
They are not and never have been. Obamas latest $200 + billion proposal is just a another reminder that he is a garden variety big spending, big tax increases, big government program, nanny state, liberal. Pls don''t accuse me of calling names......I am just describing his stance on politcal issues. Whether he is worse than Hillary or not is just an arguement of degree not substance. Since it looks like she is toast anyway, I prefer to spend my time looking for instances where the press really starts to examine and challenge him on his extreme liberalness.....hope it starts happening soon. Time for the free ride to be over. If Hillary beats him then I will return to looking for the same sort of examination by the liberal main stream media of her postions. Somehow I don't think it will happen in either case.

Your fiscally responsible dems are already talking about a second round of more spending on another stimulus package. They lost on larding up this terrible bill any more than it was but want to add more in round #2. Wanna bet that Obama votes for the additional spending if it ever get to a vote....which hopefully it will not. It won't get the sixty votes for cloture and a real vote.