Why?  They are both going to tell the same lies they've been telling up till now; the debates won't change anything.

You will get to see how they handle themselves in a televised debate with a moderator or questions from the "town-hall", but that doesn't compare to sitting in a closed room with congressional or world leaders.

When someone has to use ill-logical slander like this, it only shows that they are not informed on politics in general nor do they fully understand what brand of politics they support.  Whenever someone calls a politician in a democratic country a communist or fascist, you can be sure that that person is not the sharpest tool in the shed.

No way, fuel cell FTW!

OT: Even though I'm not American, and so can't vote, I still think that Obama could turn out to be only a celebrity, I mean if he gets voted in on popularity, and then has no idea how to run one of the most important countries (read: American housing crash affecting entire world), then you're stuck with him for 4 years, is that not a serious problem?

McCain wants to get rid of the Ethanol Subsidies.

Yeah... I think it's insulting when people insinuate that Iraq WANTS us there like some Mom doting over her slacker kid.

They don't want us there.  They need us there.  It's a big difference.

When they do polls in iraq... they find that over half the population hates that the US is there... and an even higher percentage hates the thought that we would leave.

I get to be all self righteous about it too because I was against the war in the first place... and didn't think the congress would be stupid enough to do it.

Frankly, that's a good thing. Ethanol is so short-sighted it's unbelievable. It requires so much land, land that is either used for forest (combat global warming), or food, so with ethanol it's either fuel, the earth, or food. There are other alternatives the US should be pushing for.

I agree getting rid of Ethanol is a good thing. 

Just stating the point that he's against it.  Also there seems to be some proof that it isn't even helping the enviroment due to all the oil it takes to make the stuff... and it's lower efficency.  Now Sugarcane Ethanol.. at least has enviromental benefits.

The UN also thinks it's part of the global food crisis and call biofuels "Criminal."

McCain is also for less combustion energy as it is... promoting Nuclear electricity over Obama's plan for Coal Electricity. (like bush!)

Obama's energy policy is basically the biproduct of the lobbyists he picked up in Illnois.  Big coal and ethanol companies are going to gain a lot from Obama's incresed importance placed on those fuels.

One of the countries biggest Ethanol and Coal producers.  Though i'm not sure how that relates to car engines.

Nuclear power is a good choice for the time being, while other technologies are so far behind.

Yeah, I think I'd agree with the UN there, I think it's incredibly selfish for rich countries to use valuble food land just so they can have a bigger engined SUV, when people in poorer countries starve.

I would help the enviroment if it was planted on land that wasn't absorbing Co2, but it's likely that it will be planted where forest or farmland used to be.

You mean Obama is going to cave to lobbyist? How is that change? He is just like the rest of them, a politician (and thus worthless).

I'm not voting for either, but only because I'm too young. :(
But I would vote for Obama because:
I'm an extreme social liberal and fairly liberal economically
I agree with most of his positions
I don't want the possibility of a Republican court
We don't need more of the failed policies from the last 28 years

It's time for a Democratic nation.