i thought you said that you’d read marx? calling obama, or clinton for that matter, a marxist only proves that either you’re too stupid to understand it, or that you just out and out lied in an effort to prove your point. marxism is about workers reclaiming the means of production for themselves in an effort to reconnect themselves with the products of their labor, something marx saw as an inherent need in being human, especially in an industrialised society. communism, as he coined the term, was what he deemed the most appropriate means to reach that conclusion. obviously, as is the case with any political system, its never in real life what it seems on paper. however, no where in any campaign speech given by any democratic candidate has anyone made any claim even coming close to calling for the people to reclaim the means of production from the bourgouise. It seems, although your bad grammar may be confusing me, that you’re equating higher taxes for government programs, either of the democratic candidtaes health care policies, or their positions on our occupation of iraq with marxism. funding the government by means of a broad tax base and not through the rising waters raises all ships economic policies of neo-cons is actually a tenant of liberalism, or, and probably more to your uninformed disdain, social liberalism. i would again, simply ask that you look into things before you comment on things you obviously know nothing about, if for no other reason, it makes you look just opinionated, and not like an opinionated moron.

as for the “GWOT”, do you honestly believe that any president, democrat or republican would actually surrender to our enemies? can you really picture anyone walking out in front of the whitehouse with a white flag waving and saying you can have it? if that’s the case, then as robbie likes to put it, you need to get out of the gene pool. quickly and unceremoniously. you have no more a place in the political world, as insignificant as this is, than any member of the Klan or the Black Panthers do. that aside, do you not realize the actual and real irony of what you’re claiming a democratic president would do? what governmental entity is it exaclty that we would surrender to? what country is calling for our surrender? the answer, sadly, is none. as much as you and your ilk have tried to convince us, we’re not at war with any nation. we’re at war with a group of people, who, like yourself, have over inflated their importance in the world. iran is no more out to destroy america than colombia is. i know that you’re going to want to say something about iran’s government threatening our interests or our friends, but all the huffing and puffing in the world won’t make them an actual threat. secondly, what part of this current police action is actually global? do you consider it global becuase it’s not happening here? we’re limited in combat theatres to one region of the globe right now. it would seem simple enough that to call this global we’d have to be engaged anywhere other than the middle east. as it is we’re only in one continent. so you should more accurately call it the MEWOT, although, being the propagandist, that probably doesn’t help your cause all that much. as for that w, the united states consititution (look it up when you check out that marxism stuff) says that only congress has the authority to declare war. which they didn’t do. so what we have now is the president bypassing congress, and therefore the people, to wage what is actually a military run, region specific, police action, not an actual war, by an stretch of reason or the imagination. so really, when you break it down into actual facts and not politicised distortions, the democrats are supposed to surrender to our over emphasized non threat enemies in the MEPAOT. for some reason, that doesn’t have quite the same ring to it, but then again, neither does anything any republican ever says when you expend the effort to shovel through all the hypocritical bullshit, or in your case, the neo-fascist, teat suckling, moronic bullshit, but hey, apples are apples either way you slice ‘em.

“…in the run-up to the primaries, after ranking as the 16th- and 10th-most-liberal during his first two years in the Senate.”

and even that’s funny since not even six months ago y’all were calling john edwards the most liberal senator.

also, i think its funny that you omitted the line “…of 2007…” from this, since it changes every year. Although that makes sense, because it sounds worse when you lie by omission.

also, here’s some info on your guy McChrist from the same article:

“Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., the only other senator whose presidential candidacy survived the initial round of primaries and caucuses this year, did not vote frequently enough in 2007 to draw a composite score. He missed more than half of the votes in both the economic and foreign-policy categories. On social issues, which include immigration, McCain received a conservative score of 59.”

since he didn’t VOTE ENOUGH to be counted this year i’ll just list his rating from last year:

composite conservative score: 56.7
conservative ranking: 46th

he’s barely even in the top 50.

here’s the link to the article, so you know, there’s no calling bullshit.

http://news.nationaljournal.com/articles/voteratings/