Here's a video on McCain :p

YouTube - McCain's YouTube Problem Just Became a Nightmare

Attacking his name and his associations really takes away from his real weakness: his voting record and his positions. Let him stand on those and see if the American people want George McGovern wrapped up in a pretty package.

I'm not american, I don't live there and really my opinion shouldn't matter to you lot at all.
It is a known fact that politicians at large are liers. All of them. They will say one thing in their race to win presidency and act differently once they are in office.
Let's assume that all 3 candidates are lying in some of their statements about various things they plan to do.
Be honest with yourselves when you answer this and pick from each candidate a statement they said that you believe they will not really do (or in fact do the opposite), and post them, and you might learn some things off of one another.

Unfortunately, politicians in the US don't lie about how good their suggestions are. They lie about what their plans are. For example - McCain will drone on endlessly about how much of a threat Iran is, how the US must be a force for good, etc. Just like most other politicians in the US, of course - but what does it mean? What are they really suggesting? No one knows, including most likely themselves.

I mean, seriously - "the first thing I'd do when I become president is to sit the Shia and Sunni together and say: Cut the crap"? What the hell is that? Can't learn anything from listening to bull**** like this.

Because choosing the candidate that ran against the only sitting president to resign in disgrace is such a good example. Who honestly is going to whine about the guy who ran against Nixon the year that he ordered a break-in of his oppositions' headquarters?

If it's 1972 all over again, I'm sure as hell not voting for the Nixon in this analogy.

I'm not sure what you were trying to accomplish with that statement as it is naively and blatantly untrue. Who are these "real terrorists" that we should be going after instead? We haven't gone after the real terrorists?
------
This simply fails in comparison to Obama's voting record and extremism. Obama is a diehard socialist. End of story (I really do hope it does end and doesn't make its way into our government anymore).

Anyone who says Obama is a socialist doesn't truly understand what socialism is.

“I believe that America's free market has been the engine of America's great progress. It's created a prosperity that is the envy of the world. It's led to a standard of living unmatched in history. And it has provided great rewards to the innovators and risk-takers who have made America a beacon for science, and technology, and discovery…We are all in this together. From CEOs to shareholders, from financiers to factory workers, we all have a stake in each other's success because the more Americans prosper, the more America prospers.”
— Barack Obama, New York, NY, September 17, 2007

Osama bin Laden comes to mind, you know the guy who actually attacked us.

But his policies do not reflect this statement.

We will start with the two extremes. Communism and Total free market/capitalism. If you were to move from free market to communism, you slowly increase the amount of socialism in the system until you have its ultimate extreme, communism. Are we good on this?

Now let's talk about where Obama falls into this. Let's start off with this. His health care plan. Clearly leaning towards Socialism. His tax views. socialistic. The concept of a free market is you let the economy run itself. Not you get the government involved with super huge tax systems that takes largely from the people who are responsible for the growth of the economy (the rich). Do I believe the rich should be taxed more than your regular everyday person? Yes, but certainly not as much as they currently are.

We aren't going after Osama bin Laden.?I must be missing something. If there is something else you think they should be doing...

Actually, you do what we call a "revolution". But please continue.
The truth is that the amount of taxes you pay now is a tremendous amount, when put together nation- wide. And that money is used for subsidies to farming and other industries, aid to various pet projects the senators have - from healtcare to expanded shopping malls, weapon- production, and bridges to nowhere. There's also government welf.. grants to achieving youth and promising research projects. And all of that - if the unspoken intention was not to "grab as much as possible for yourself" - would be genuinely socialistic. From the redistribution of wealth, and all the way to impacting the consumer- habits of the general population.

So to answer your initial proposition - as you prove, it would never work to gradually move to socialism in America. The fear of the reds just wouldn't allow it. So what you do instead, is to just /call/ it something different - and sell it as free market practice.

Seems like it's working pretty good, too.

So the question isn't what Obama is going to do for nefarious things with the country (that McCain will avoid by looking stern and allow people to be exploited like usual). The question is what you do with the government. What sort of process is involved, and whether or not the politicians you vote in are prepared to argue well for the things they want to accomplish.

Much more difficult than just condemning "socialism" (even if it's a euphemism for waste and cronyism) - but in the end it's usually more effective.