>>how is voting for someone racism?
and this is unprooven, i agree some people out there will vote for him just because he's black
but it's still unprooven...<<

The numbers do not lie. Learn math.

He would never have been nominated were he not black. I still cringe to call him black. He had all the perks of his white parent's raising and ignorant [racial slurs for 2 races] still think he must totally understand them and want to give them larger handouts because he grew up so black.

>>do you know what the first thing most republicans will tell you against obama? that he's a terrorrist and is a muslim, with no facts to back that up<<

Oh really? I had no idea. This isn't surprising, though, on account of the fact that it's not true. Why does it always have to be that your opponents are biggots and racists? Why can't you just respond to reality in a dignified manner? Maybe they're just not socialists? Maybe they do not think we should give the government "redistributive power" to carry out "social and economic justice"? Maybe they don't think the government creates AIDS to kill black people? Maybe they don't like people who aren't disgusted by terrorists, or at least don't want one in their nation's highest office? Maybe they don't like his campaign's hypocrisy in dealing with real questions? Maybe they have the most basic understanding of economics (as opposed to no understanding) and don't think higher taxes will help our economy? Maybe they're just not socialialists, so they're not voting for the socialist candidate. There's nothing racist about not being a socialist. There's nothing racist about not wanting Obama's awful policies for this country or being disgusted by the man himself for being a piece of s[ ]t.

Science does not include a faith that life began from a primordial soup of proteins and basic amino acids. Only faith includes such a faith.

It's a scientific hypothesis. Some people figure it to be more likely [almost certain! it has to be! there could be no other way!], some people figure it to be less likely [not. f[ ]in'. possible.]. That's why scientists do tests to see how complicated of amino acids they can create with substances and conditions likely to have existed in the earth's history by processes like lightning. They're searching for evidence to support or contradict this hypothesis. You can equivocate and call it a theory in place of a hypothesis, but ultimately it will be just as accurate or inaccurate a description of how life began regardless of how confident in this proposed method of life-creation a scientist is.

Spoken like someone who truely has no idea what's going on.

That most of Europe has given in to socialist pansies and your economies have been sucking nuts for it doesn't mean that the change in Amerika isn't on the verge of starting that same process in a few days. Those of us who don't have our heads in the sand aren't going to celebrate as our economies sink as low as yours.

? I'm confused by BC Cougar's post. We have the numbers who viewers of all the networks, and, with the exception of fox (39% republican 33% democrat) they're all VERY democrat/liberal/socialist leaning.

There's no debate. The statistics do not lie. The majority of the media is still VERY liberal. Something like 80% of reporters/staffers are still democrat, all broadcast media considered.

Palin in a bikini!

? It wasn't the Jews' fault, Grushdeva? I gotta stop watching CNN.

Unless you have something to base it on, you're just making it up.

I KNOW! You should run for office!!

You are right. They should have spent more than 150k on her clothes and hid this fact.

She's damned if she does, damned if she doesn't. As liberal as the media is, if it's a conservative woman running, they'll still talk about her clothes and appearance as much as about her politics. Don't any of you see the rest of the news other than this story?

Apparently in his country they're not that good at math, avogadro.

So What!? Racist!