[AladainAF]

A non-bullshit argument is something of substance, that would actually have an affect on my decision one way or the other.

Ok, so does a politician saying things like "Hope", "Change", "Unity", etc substance to you? I just watched Bill Richardson on CNN 5 minutes ago talk to Wolf Blitzer for 10 minutes of about how Obama is better because of "Hope", and "Change", and a "Fresh Face Internationally". That, to me, is not substance. I am not voting for Obama, because just like you want a reason to vote AGAINST Obama, I want a reason to vote FOR Obama. Unfortunately, not one candidate that has a chance of reasonably winning the general election I have any interest in voting for. I disagree with McCain, and Clinton for sure. I have no idea where I stand with Obama, because Obama has not given me one reason to vote for him, other than words. Even Obama's cheerleaders (i.e. Bill Richardson) can only sit on the air and say things like "Hes the right candidate because hes going to bring change!". Others, like Kirk Watson, can't even list ONE legislative accomplishment.

The whole flag pin thing is just bullshit. I don't care if he does wear one. I don't care if he doesn't wear one.

I agree with you on this. I also view "Change" and "Hope" and "Unity" as bullshit as well. Talk is cheap. The reason Wright has been such a hot-fire issue with Obama is because Obamas entire campaign has been based upon things that Wright conflicts with.

What Obama wants to do about healthcare would fall into the non-bullshit category thoug

You mean this? To me, this is completely fluff. There is nothing in there that describes how anything is going to get done.