Norquist on McCain and Obama's Definition of "Change"

Politico has been posting a series of questions lately and the recent one elicited a very common-sense response from and straight to the point kind of guy.

The question:

Suggest one question for the foreign policy debate and for extra credit, what is McCain thinking?

Grover Norquist’s reponse:

On what is McCain thinking: Why am I expected to defend the Bush track record? I ran against the guy in 2000.

And we get a second one, even better than the first:

Will Obama’s caving into the labor union bosses demands for a return to protectionism and an end to free trade expansion impoverish Africa to the point that Obama’s economic policy will lead to more deaths overseas than Malaria does now on an annual basis?

You would think that people would be able to tell 2 things. First, McCain is not Bush, he ran AGAINST the guy in 2000, google it.

Second, that with Obama/Biden pandering to the trial lawyer-union member-immigrant hating-free trade bashing-nationlize everything crowd; why is the American people being tricked that is the “change” we need?

I looked up change in a dictionary Obama gave me, it said:

any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods a system of society or group living in which there is no private property a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done

Wierd huh?