Not that I would vote McCain but that was pretty smart of him do think of those people.

That's the kinda thinking that wins elections.

I think by picking Michelle that may bring into question her writings in college.  [I can see the GOP running an ad, "So, Obama thinks she's one of the smartest people, here's what she had to say while at Princeton...]

Men do not have to go through the physical and mental changes women go through to have a child.

Obama said they were using embryoes that were going to be discarded.  He made it sound like it was no big deal because they were going to throw them out anyway!    

The question I have then, is if the current lifestyle is abject poverty and the next rung down is homelessness, then what?  What is in the best interest of woman and child?

Or is this where people start asserting that "poor women shouldn't have sexual intercourse!" or that poor women are obligated to give up their babies because it would be "for the best"?

We pretend that since there is uncertainty re when life begins, what we're doing isn't really murdering merely to maintain our lifestyle.

With that in mind, its obvious that the last thing we want is to have that uncertainty removed - we don't want to know when life begins. We might have to make some uncomfortable changes in our lifestyle.

Well until you and the mouse in your pocket can show legal, ethical, medical or moral standing, what we do isn't your call nor your judgment to make.

You'll also have to do better than your ridiculous, sweeping assumptions trivializing the choices people have to make in looking after their own and loved ones' well being.

In the meantime, I'd wrangle an angry mob, head over to the Olympics and arrest every US athlete, female or male, as potential murderers and abetters just to fall hard on the right "side" of life.

Training for elite athletic competition is a common cause of spontaneous abortion, expulsion of fertilized eggs and a big monkey wrench in the reproductive cycle.

After that, I'd get to work on purging every pharmacy of OTC pharmaceuticals that endanger Raw Life everywhere along the reproductive chain.

How will he ever, as President, handle actually having to decide whether to go to war or not when his hardest thing in the past was picking a side?

  And we also heard that, beyond Michelle and his secluded grandmother, the wisest people he'd use for his administration are Sam Nunn (anti gays in the military) and Richard Lugar.

  Maybe while he reaches across the aisle in post-partisanship he could do the same with Clinton supporters like Wes Clark or Charle Rangel, with respect to his own party, but then he doesn't think in terms of the Democratic Party but talks only about his Movement.

  His own district was wholly anti-war.  No agony there.  He didn't run for U.S. Senate until the following year.  And he gave a speech that was so little thought of that there is no tape of it and no transcript (confirmed by Axelrod).  The speech we've seen in ads was re-enacted in a studio just for the ad.  For some reason his own version of the speech was taken off his website.

  As for the debate, I most liked his answer about Evil.

WHAT'S THE MOST SIGNIFICANT -- LET ME ASK IT THIS    WAY:  WHAT'S THE MOST GUT WRENCHING DECISION YOU'VE EVER HAD TO MAKE AND HOW DID YOU PROCESS THAT, COME TO THAT DECISION?

 A    WELL, YOU KNOW, I THINK THE OPPOSITION TO THE WAR IN IRAQ WAS AS TOUGH A DECISION THAT I'VE HAD TO MAKE NOT ONLY BECAUSE THERE WERE POLITICAL CONSEQUENCES BUT ALSO BECAUSE SADDAM HUSSIEM WAS A BAD PERSON AND THERE WAS NO DOUBT THAT HE MET AMERICA ILL, BUT I WAS FIRMLY CONVINCED                                                                            AT THE TIME THAT WE DID NOT HAVE STRONG EVIDENCE OF WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION AND THERE WERE A LOT OF QUESTIONS THAT AS I SPOKE TO EXPERTS KEPT ON COMING UP, DO WE KNOW HOW THE SHIITES AND THE SUNNIS AND THE KURDS ARE GOING TO GET ALONG IN A POST SADDAM SITUATION, WHAT'S OUR ASSESSMENT AS TO HOW THIS WILL AFFECT THE BATTLE AGAINST TERRORIST LIKE AL-QAEDA, HAVE WE FINISHED THE JOB IN
AFGHANISTAN SO I AGONIZED OVER THAT AND I THINK QUESTIONS OF WAR AND PEACE GENERALLY ARE SO PROFOUND YOU KNOW WHEN YOU MEET THE TROOPS, THEY ARE 19, 20, 21-YEAR OLD KIDS AND YOU ARE PUTTING THEM INTO HARM'S WAY THERE IS A SOLEMN OBLIGATION THAT YOU DO EVERYTHING YOU CAN TO GET THAT
DECISION RIGHT.  AND NOW AS THE WAR WENT FORWARD, VERY DIFFICULT ABOUT HOW LONG DO YOU KEEP FUNDING THE WAR IF YOU STRONGLY BELIEVE THAT IT'S NOT AMERICA'S NATIONAL INTEREST AT THE SAME TIME YOU DON'T WANT TO HAVE TROOPS WHO ARE OUT THERE WITHOUT THE EQUIPMENT THEY NEED.  SO THAT ALL THOSE QUESTIONS SURROUNDING THE WAR HAVE BEEN
VERY DIFFICULT FOR ME.