Wouldn't the burden of truth be on the ones accusing? So far I haven't seen your truth?

In a court of law, perhaps but apparently not in the court of the liberal media.

That's not a bad idea, though. Let's put that little bastard under oath.

This is precisely my concern. As I indicated in another post, we really don't know who Obama is. We know a lot of facts and data about him, but we don't know what shaped his life and his outlook. What is his world-view and how did he come by it? What is the source of his values, and what are those values? There is a great deal about this man they we do not know because he has not been in the national spotlight very long.

We don't need a witch hunt. Obama has already stated that he wants to spread our wealth around. We call a spade a spade around here (Racist pejorative NOT intended).

WTF do you think McCain is preaching! The same damn thing!!

Tax the rich more and tax the not rich less.

They are out there all right and they are not undocumented, just unanswered.

The LA Times tape is not a figment of anyone's imagination. It exists and voters annot see it for themselves.

Ayers and his bitch definitely bombed government buildings and killed innocent people and aasaociated with Obama. We just don't know what the real connection was. Asking the question is not (to use a phrase I've heard from Obama's campaign about a thousand times) a pathetic and desperate attempt to smear Obama.

It's established that Rev. Wright is a bigoted hater of America and that Obama was a long time member of that church. Obama says he never heard any of that. It's not a desperation smear tactic to question that.

This is the final week of the campaign and, finally, open-minded voters are beginning to wonder just what they are trying to hide.