Now, it’s interesting you bring up Iraq. Because Obama is only pulling out of Iraq so he can put more helicopters, battalions and armed drones in … Afghanistan (from a speech he gave on 14 July, 2008 : “We need more troops, more helicopters, more satellites, and more Predator drones in the Afghan border region.”). So, the US will move from killing Iraqis to killing Afghanis. How is that a better option?

I don’t make these points to be malicious, but merely to point out that, in this election, both candidates, to my mind, are equally bloodthirsty, manipulative and conniving, and the record (not their words, but their actual record) bears this out. And I remain stymied by the wilful blindness of many of their supporters on both sides of the fence.

I did research Pam Martens and found the Z-Net article “Obama’s Money Cartel”. Most informative, as was the reader’s response at the end that pointed out that the “cartel” invested equally in Hillary Clinton’s campaign. So – the Dems (candidate notwithstanding) have their ‘owners’, and the Reps theirs.

I’ve never believed there was much difference between these two parties anyway. If I were voting, the D’s position on Iraq would probably be the deciding factor for me, but I’d certainly not be wearing my rose-tinted glasses to the polling booth.

The O voting pattern that you referenced is – disturbing. And if no one on the other side makes an issue of it then McCain’s must be even more so.

Now, onto the other comment. While it’s true that Obama has said he will NOT take any money from Federal lobbyists, as someone pointed out, it ain’t as simple as that. A look at Obama contributions up till May 2008 (and Pam Martens, an ex-stockbroker turned activist with 20+ years working on Wall Street, is to be thanked for this information *), show that the following companies are among the 20 top contributors to Obama (see if the names ring any bells) … banks Goldman Sachs, UBS AG, Lehman Brothers, JP Morgan Chase, Citigroup, Morgan Stanley and Credit Suisse; hedge fund Citadel Investment Group.

The top FIVE contributors to Obama are law firms which also front lobby groups: Sidley Austin LLP; Skadden, Arps, et al; Jenner & Block; Kirkland & Ellis; Wilmerhale, aka Wilmer Cutler Pickering. In addition, three Obama aides have previously been lobbyists for a number of corporations.

That’s just one point. The other requires you have a look at his voting record, which sees him consistently vote against citizen interests and in favour of coporate interests. Class Action Fairness Act 2005; Iraq and Afghanistan War Funding 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008; Patriot Act 2005; National Medical Error Disclosure and Compensation Act 2005; Hardrock Mining and Reclamation Act 2007. His voting on all these has been interesting, to say the least.

Additionally, he’s also voted (a) AGAINST capping bankruptcy interest rates at 30%, (b) FOR capping damages in medical malpractice suits, (c) AGAINST tougher reporting requirements for nuclear industries (staff from the company Exelon, including its executives, have funded Obama to the tune of around US$220,000+); (d) AGAINST single-payer health care; (e) despite his rhetoric, FOR NAFTA.

It’s almost trivial to also mention, after all this, that he’s also missed almost one quarter of all voting sessions since 2005.

So, based on the brief selection above of a daunting pile of intel, do I think he’ll change anything? Nah. But that’s my own personal view, based on reading I’ve done. Others’ mileage may vary, although I’d love to compare positions a year down the track … if he wins.

* Pam Martens is a woman to be lauded. She is the recipient of the Woman of Courage Award from the National Organization for Women and the Susan B. Anthony Award from its New York City Chapter. Just search on her name and read what she has to say.