I'm not voting for him because I'm Canadian. But if I was an American, I would. I think that he's the kind of guy that any country would be blessed to have as a leader. Someone who has the potential to redeem a system corrupted long ago. Wish we had somebody like that.

Because I'm english

I'm voting for McCain, because inexperience is what the last guy had, and I find it a shame on my fellow Democrats that you ignored that in favor of a guy who's good at telling you what you want to hear, which is also what the last guy had (until recently).

Originally it was solely because I like nearly all of his views, a lot more than McCain's, now it has been cemented with the horrible VP choice of McCain. I really dislike ultra-conservative religious zealots. (Notice I didn't put any particular religion)

Funny how Obama's plan on getting out of Iraq is essentially what Bush and the Iraqi's are now agreeing on?

However, one glaring hole I see is 'how' Republicans want to curb personal freedoms. With specific extreamist Christian logic. That is a one way street that would end up like the Taliban, Saudi Arabia, etc. and that I just cannot even come close to accepting.

As for the dems and financial freedoms, huh? Everytime there is a republican in the white house, we go deeper and deeper into debt, economy tanks, government gets much larger, and I beleive Bush has taken WAY more personal freedoms in his 8 years than any president combined for all of our history.

Whoa, whoa, whoa. Let's not rewrite history here. McCain and Bush wanted the surge, which has put Iraq in the position to let our troops start phasing out.

Obama was steadfastly against the surge and wanted to pull out of Iraq no matter what shape the country was left in.

Which one makes more sense in the long run? Bailing out of Iraq and leaving an unstable hotbed in an already unstable region or pushing to make the country stable (well, as much as possible anyway) before leaving?

Just because the timelines end up the same doesn't mean the two strategies share much in common. One of them involved fucking the Iraqis and leaving them open to Iran and other influences, the other gives them a fair shot at self-government.

We started this mess, it's our obligation to finish it as best we can, not run back home like a bunch of chickenshits and cause even more strife in an already fucked up region of the world.

The fact that Obama and his supporters are trying to draw credit for one of the few things Bush got right makes me sick.

exactly

I'm not talking about the surge. Even though I actually agree it was necessary. I'm talking about the shorter timetable to removing troops whereas previously Bush and McCain had no timetable at all.

Just a week or so ago Bush/US and the Iraqi government agreed US troops would be out in 18 months. Did you completely miss that news? That is basically the exact same thing Obama has been saying since he began his run for pres. To pull out in a predetermined time, less than 2 years. Our handover of the Ankbar district the other day was part of this gradual decline.

Not voting for him, because the American authorities are really anal about only allowing US citizens to vote. Bah!

The difference being that Obama wanted a timeline no matter what shape the country was in.

Bush and McCain are now seeing the surge worked and that a pullout in 2010 or so is feasible.

One is reacting to a situation intelligently and with regard to Iraqi longevity, the other is selfish politicking.

Like I said, Obama wanted to pull out before the surge and fought against the surge. Now he wants to take credit for the idea of a 2010 pullout? Bullshit.