To sarahbear:

Regarding the Iraq War. Obama can say he was against all he wants. The fact is that he was not a US Senator at the time of the vote so he never had to actually vote for or against it. If the war had turned out to be a good thing today, then he could just as easily be saying that he was in support of it from the beginning. By not having had to take a stand at the time of the actual vote, he can adjust his position to match the direction of the wind. ALso note that in subsequent votes, he did vote to provide funding for the war.

On Healthcare. For healthcare to be truly universally accessible to all Americans, everyone has to pay into it. There cannot be an opt-out option or it won't work. Look at successful universal healthcare programs in other countries and you will see that there is no opt-out feature. This is why Hillary's plan makes more sense and is more feasible for successful implementation.

Anyone who is interested in the financial contributions to any candidate can check out the information at www.opensecrets.org which is a non-partisan website. For all Obama's claims about not accepting money from lobbyists, he's still accepting money from corporation themselves as another poster has pointed out and the argument about being beholden to them can be applied equally to him and other any candidate.

Obama's speaks well but his performance in debates reveals his lack of depth on the issues. The speeches are uplifting but they will not deliver the results that Americans want.

I say it should be a Clinton-Obama ticket in 2008. That would give him the required depth to succeed Hillary as President in 2016.