You're not offending in the least; appreciate the give and take. The fact that gun ownership is a cultural thing as you say is my point. People do not own guns because they are bitter. Also, there is the Constitution/ Bill of Rights issue; it's generally accepted that gurantees the right to bear arms.

.
Not trying to offend, just trying to undestand.

The gun thing to us is hard to understand, its a cultural thing, religion to but less so.

I heard someone say that it feels like a birthright to own a gun. If that is true I can understand the anger involved, kinda.

Of course not. They have been religious, gun owners culturally for two hundred years.

.
Yeh, that was regretable. There is just some things you should not say, that was bad bab bad.

But is it true? mmmmmm

Do they embrace faith over there in the Bible Belt partly because they kind of resent the more econimicaly advanced US coasts?

I don't think Obama's views are extreme at all. But his last comments about rust belt working class Americans being religious or owning firearms because they are bitter is to them. That group will decide the election this fall; swing voters, moderates, etc.

S-Pig
Nothing realy stays the same politicaly in the US or here in the UK, it just seems like that because things have been stable more or less since the end of WW2, interesting times I'll give you that.
Also - did'nt intend to bad mouth capitalism. It has undeniably served the west well. But so has socialism, at least over here were we have both systems incorporated in a mixed economy. I don't think Utopia is possible with either on thier own.

I think somewere you commented on Obamas Extreem views, these views lie in the centre of Euro politics. They have been tried & tested over here successfully for a generation. They are nothing to be affraid of and are not 'extreem' or 'elitest'(whatever that means).

How sad and embarassing to claim to know who someone is when you don’t know them, but how typical and illustrative of the arrogant, smug, elitism I encounter here.

I do not identify with the counterculture. Embracing drugs, multiple sex partners and the like is nothing to rejoice over. So you start off completely wrong.

I was also never disillusioned, so you are wrong again. I have always realized what this country is; it’s history of racism and genocide, etc. So, there was no point at which I changed. I am a Socialist philosophically and always have been, I believe in equal distribution of wealth and that no human being should by accident of birth be relegated to less than human status including not having access to health care, an education, etc. I also do not believe in one man one vote; I think there should be criteria met before one is allowed to vote. I could go on and on.

I also think religion is a crock and a fairy tale and nothing is more harmful to me than faith in a fairy tale, but it would be foolish of me to discount it’s importance to tens of millions and to encourage a politician to take that stance.

I do seek social change, so wrong one more time. But I do so realizing what is attainable over time and what isn’t and most importantly, I realize what you don’t and that is the ramifications of naiveté and alienating segments of society that take you away from your goal. The only change that ever occurs in this country is by being pragmatic and compromising. Do I like this no. Do I know beyond a shadow of a doubt that this is preferable to the alternative; yes.

Case in point, you see I have this problem with people dying horrific deaths and with human suffering. The “activist” leftists who voted for Ralph Nader, nearly 3 million of them, actually contributed significantly to untold death and suffering. I have an issue with that. I see this election cycle being eerily reminiscent of that all over again.

I applaud activists. I condemn fools

Socialist Pig -
You haven't become pragmatic "in your old age"- you've become, as I heard Naomi Klein so eloquently put it once a person,

“Who identified themselves strongly with the counterculture and then became disillusioned somewhere along the line, but still hold onto this identity that they are progressive leftists…so rather than… dealing with the fact that they have changed, you no longer seek social change…what you become cynical about is the possibility of change, and you become very cynical particularly about activists. And you really get angry at the people who don't join you in your stance of resignation.”

Some of us still see the ability of the country to change. Maybe not in 2 years or 4 years or even 8 years. Lasting change doesn't come quickly. Will it become a far left leaning utopia - most likely not. But did cynics in the 1960s ever think integration would catch on? Changes take a movement -- an extreme displeasure in the status quo. But as long as we sit around and say "eh, it never was -- and it never will be" nothing will ever change.

.
Excellent Video,

This guy must have been busy all weekend doing this, nice work.

.
Are you kidding me, you guys have two right wing parties and you think you are moderate.

Your country averages a major war every 20 years, have a look around, no one else is doing that.

You media is run by the same gansters that are robbing you blind, all in the name of freedom.

And your state puts braindamaged people to death - what is that about?

I love you guys and wish you well, but "moderate", he he

Yes moderate. American's natural inclination is to be moderate, in the middle and to reject extremism on either side of the political spectrum.

.
"moderate"???

First of all I voted for Obama. That doesn't relieve me of my obligation to point out hypocrisy, elitism and blind cult-like allegience when it reveals itself. Secondly, it's Hillary's decision to stay in the race NOT the press. Thirdly, I have become pragmatic in my old age and know that in this country you get what you can no matter how imperfect because that is all that is possible. It is a mainly conservative, moderate, religious, bastion of capitalism and ALWAYS will be. It is a millitaristic society dominated by corporate interests and ALWAYS will be. It will NEVER be a far left socialist panacea. Pragmatism gets one something rather than nothing. What did all the pre-build up to the 2006 elections and exciting victory get theleft? NOTHING.

Pay attention less you wind up with McCain and more war and two more conservatice supreme court justices appointed for life.

.
This thing is over.

The argument that it isn't is a MYTH. The American press is keeping this lie going because it serves their interests.

Dont read the script, read the maths.

SocialistPig - The good of the Party/Country/World my friend we dont need the same old politics in Washington.

p.s if you are Solialist as your title emplies, you are backing the wrong horse - BIG TIME

.
C-Pig.
Its Clintons shinanigins that are risking the Whitehouse for Obama. If the maths were the other way around I would be critisising him. But they are not, she needs to get behind him NOW.

“This is a perfect example of why Democrats lose elections.”

OK, that's my new favorite video. If nothing else comes out of this insane primary season, people sure are getting skillful with their editing systems.

I take it you mean excellent that John McCain may wind up in the White House. Shame, shame . . . when did they turn you?

Excellent!

I take "umbrage" with the fact that this new breed progressive elitists are so dividing the Democratic party that their actions just may put McCain in the White House.

David Saunders, a Democratic strategist and rural advocate, advised John Edwards’s presidential campaign but is now neutral. He said he believed that Mr. Obama’s comments would offend rural voters.

“It could mean he’s rendered himself unelectable,” Mr. Saunders said. “This is a perfect example of why Democrats lose elections.”