McCain outlines vision of Iraq victory

Most people have no idea what Obama is all about. This is a guy who has only spend two years in the senate (most of that time he has been running for President) people see the word "change" and think that sounds great without knowing what the candidate is all about. This is a man who can potentially be our commander and chief and can even say the pledge of alligence to the flag. But, he wants to be commander and chief?

Obama surrounds himself with thugs and racist biggots.

Great Leaders surround themselves with great people just like Obama.

"Coast2coast lumped Obama in with Jackson, Sharpton and Farrakhan. Essentially, the only thing these four have in common is that they are all African American (though Obama is biracial). They fall in different places in the political spectrum. Coast2coast, you have no credibility whatsoever. Your view below confirmed it for me."
All three have endorsed Obama for President. Along with Bill Ayres (Known Terrorist),Hamas (terrorist group),Tony Rezko,Jeremiah Wright, The President of Iran.

Yeah; as soon as someone with a neutral perspective comments that the left was getting killed in this debate, that person OF COURSE, has no credibility! Always works that way with the left. They loose debate after debate, and it's always the listeners/readers fault! Can't wait to see Hussein debate McCain. After he falls flat on his face, it will OF COURSE be someone else's fault. The viewers, the moderators, the news network who hosted it, ext ext. CLASSIC!

Coast2coast lumped Obama in with Jackson, Sharpton and Farrakhan. Essentially, the only thing these four have in common is that they are all African American (though Obama is biracial). They fall in different places in the political spectrum. Coast2coast, you have no credibility whatsoever. Your view below confirmed it for me.

Curly, Larry and Moe had a great run based upon slapstick also.

I'm pretty much center when it comes to politics, but just reading through some of the recent comments I have to say Billnewbie, whysbad, and kiowamohican are getting the much better of these debates.

Instead of blaming the government for everything you may just want to look at why the health care system is so flawed. Doctors have to carry exorbitant amounts of malpractice insurance just in order to practice medicine. You go to the doctor and they run you through five tests to tell you you have the flu. They have to do this to cover their behinds in hopes of not getting sued. This drives up the costs of a doctors visit. People have over used insurance for years and years. What I mean by this is someone with good insurance only has to pay a small co-pay or nothing at all at a doctors visit. So, people don't actually see the big bill. They see the ten dollar co-pay and are done with it. If people actually had to pay the whole doctor bill they would think twice about going to the doctors office for a hang nail. There isn't any competition among medical doctors because of this. The can charge ten dollars for a band aid and not think twice about it because the insurance company will pay it. I'm a strong believer in Health savings accounts which can be used to pay for medical procedures. It would help competition among doctors and bring down the cost of going to the doctor. How many people go into a doctors office and ask how much a procedure is going to cost? You wouldn't buy a car or a toaster without knowing how much they will cost. Look at the procedures that aren't typically covered under health insurance like lasik eye surgery. When they first came out it was very expensive and not a lot of people could afford it. Then more doctors were offering it and competition helped drop the cost. It is now very reasonable to have it done now. Don't play the blame game all the time you need to look at solutions and government isn't always the answer.

Hang in there Sassy, from the few posts I've seen you seem to be sincere in your decision-seeking. This is what democracy should be about - both the process and seeking a high standard for your processing.

NVgrf, yeah, I'm a little slow sometimes in coming to realize the futility with the hardened ineducable.

Awww, the poor baby took his ball and went home. Can't come down to the level of all us "commoners" in a blog. That's fine, head back over to Europe so you can suck the majestic slong of all your socialist buddies. After McCain wins in November, all your type can ask yet AGAIN...WHAT HAPPENED?? And blame it on all those dumb, fooled, moronic Americans.

hey! why isn't it ok to just have a different opinion? nobody is going to "enlighten" anyone and all of a sudden change their political stance based on a gazettextra blog...

Our perceptions come from our experiences and our goals for the future, our family needs and our vision for America. But, IMHO, it doesn't help to get so carried away with our attempts to "convert" someone...kind of a waste of time, don't you think? Thank God we live in a land where it is ok to discuss political views publicly, but do we have to make personal attacks too? (I'm scolding myself, as well...)

Quite right again NVgrf, left wing types do seem to be reason challenged, as is so well shown in your most of their posts.

mabuse... - You will never be able to reason with these right wing types. But you have certainly hit the nail on the head on many fronts.

Apology accepted. Now if only you would apologize for slandering your country....

billie, you never heard of bi-residentiality? You love to accuse others of hate. Must be a topic in which have some expertise. These exchanges with nothing but name-calling and accusations of name-calling are hardly enlightening to anyone. You confuse evidence-based citation with hate. Speaking of which, I DO hate slipping into them and down to your level. Apologies to all; carry on. So be it. One has more pressing things to engage.

Mabusejuvenalis:
Whining and complaining? That characterizes your posts accurately. If yours is the majority opinion, why does it bother you so much that I write what I think? What a typical reaction you've had to your "facts" being challenged. Want me to shut up and go away? Too bad.
By the way, you said you are living outside of the country, therefore your may be a citizen but you are not a resident. You left the country on your own volition and you can return whenever you like. You mischaracterize my referencing your foreign residence. I was pointing out the fact that from there, you are insulated from the effects of the policies you advocate, and absent from “the good fight”, pursuing your own interests. You do still reside elsewhere, do you not?
Unlike you, I am not interested in silencing those I disagree with. That may be your vision of a better America but it is not mine. Talk your head off. The more hatred you spew, the more you discredit yourself and your cause.
You slandered your country by belittling its charitable record to your shame. Your hatred for your country that you share with so many that you identify with will disable the political movement you believe will prevail, as it always has.
For future reference, for now I prefer the term “knuckle dragging Neanderthal”, although I am open to newer and more creative invectives.

whybe:

No one has suggested, except you and couple crude-thinking extremists mischaracterizing others in this blog, that "we rely on the Government to take care of us in all aspects of our lives." No one. That is a cheap straw man ploy and we all know it.

Nobody except Harry and Louise in the massive anti Hillary ad campaign of '93-'94 has proposed that "the government has any right (or interest) in controlling my health and telling me which doctor to see and what procedures are in the best interest of my body." That, as of now, is the privileged province of the profit-motivated insurance companies and the God-knowing right-wing religious, neither of which do I hear you addressing with any concern.

I guess you like that, and, along with it, the fact that 47,000,000 Americans have no coverage, and the endangered life of a mother has to come second to a fetus. And the fact that hundreds of people daily are seeing their nest eggs destroyed by exorbitant health and drug costs. These are not fancy talking blowhard lines. They are real lives in real situations.

Finally, you say "I do believe it's the governments (sic) responsibility to protect our borders." Since when did our borders reside in Afghanistan, Iraq, Kuwait, Colombia, Bosnia, Sudan, Viet-Nam, Cambodia, Korea, Laos, Nicaragua, Panama, Cuba, etc etc, etc, just for starters, as more jpublic examples of the US "defense" in 137 nations? Don't we have countless wiser ways to invest our trillions if we truly love our country, and wish to invest intelligently in its future? Just think of the horrid waste, only to enrich the very military industrial complex Eisenhower warned us about and its resultant destruction of our image throughout the world.

I don't mind paying taxes. I do mind paying excessive taxes. I don't mind helping out people that are down on their luck. I also feel that people need to take care of their selves first and for most. I believe that it isn't the governments responsibility to support people. People need to take responsibility for their families and for their selves. Most people in this country agree with this. I believe that there should be no limits on to what a person makes. I don't hate Bill Gates for making a lot of money. This is America and that is a great American success story. I believe people should be able to earn as much money as they can and keep as much of it as possible. I feel Americans can and know best how to spend their hard earned money better than the government. I believe we should help our people by giving them opportunities to succeed. We can't just give people a check every month and think everything is going to be ok. These people need an incentive to make their lives better. Throwing money at the problem doesn't help matters it makes them worse. The democrats have been preaching about the same topics (health care, poverty etc) for 40 years and we haven't gained anything according to them. This country does have problems but,this country isn't as bad as politicians want to make it seem. It's a political year and they are going to give you the same old gloom and doom. There is no magic wand to make everything better and it's not going to happen overnight. Sure democrats have some good ideas but so do the republicans. We are all Americans and we truly want whats best for this Country it's just how do we do that properly? Do we rely on the Government to take care of us in all aspects of our lives? I don't believe the government has any right in controlling my health and telling me which doctor to see and what procedures are in the best interest of my body. I do believe it's the governments responsibility to protect our borders.

kio and billie,
first of all, your terms like "whining" and "compaining" only expose the usual cheap rhetoric and show inability to digest productive fact-based criticism - there is a difference, both procedurally and rhetorically. Secondly the repetitive accusation to leave the country because sombody is not like "us" is troubling on several fronts, two of which are: 1) it reverberates with the same mentality of Nazi Germans uber alles, and 2) the "us" is not you. Survey after survey show that you are in the dwindling and dying minority.

Your disparagement of progressive thinking and yuopur repeated failure to analyzing beyond your own noses, hiding behind the usual dreary epithets and generalizations steeped in an arrogant self-appointed US identity, shows you for the dinosaurs you are, and you will realize it only too soon. You do not speak for "us." I respectfully resent your childish self-appointment to that privilege. And no one who is the least bit aware of the public concern believes you. So crawl back in your hole and squeak all you want about your one-issue unpatriotic unwillingness to pay taxes, and leave the future to those who care, who care honestly about more than just self-centered, unpatriotic greed.

Incidentally, not that you have any right to know, with your mad capacities for ignorant slander, I am NOT a govt employee, and I AM a US resident, AND a Wisconsin property holder; and HAVE the widse international experience to make comparisons and to know whereof I speak: criticisms of the immature, careless, vastly destructive Bush idiocy are not to be confused with unpatriotic "whining," in fact are just the opposite. Informed concern about our country's directions are myriad, and poll after poll show they are shared by over 2/3 of "OUR" population, and the opopulace has come to realize that these horrid 8 years represent the most inept (and name-calling) administration in history. So quit appropriating "our" status to your monolithic selfishness.

Mabusejuvenalis :
Those interesting ratios compare development assistance as a percentage of gross national income. It does not include disaster relief, famine relief or military aid, and since the wars we fight seem to be to the advantage of others, the main complaint of isolationists, one could add a great deal of the military budget to the total generosity of this nation. Furthermore, you ignore private charitable contributions to foreign peoples as well. Besides, spanky didn't claim our country as the most generous even though most of us do. But we are, consistently, the one most reliable country that others turn to in times of distress. Even those on your list which you think are superior to us have accepted massive amounts of aid from us, and some who call us enemy have accepted our help as well. We have always stood ready to help any people who need it. Mabusejuvenalis, since you have taken up residence in a foreign land, it seems not only that you are where you want to be, but that you are ashamed of your former home. If things are as bad here as you seem to think, why did you walk away when your country needs you? Rather than work for your concept of peace and justice here where you find it so lacking, you left, pursuing you self-interest just like so many you find fault with. Yet you still want to influence politics here while insulated from the effects of the policies you advocate.

mabuse:
I personally could care less what you think of me. You are just a typical whining, far left elitist. Anyone reading your posts can see that. People like you are the ones Americans laugh at. All you do is complain, mock the American lifestyle, and tell us how great the European socialist countries are. As I posted in another thread, here are the European tax rates for all the "clueless" American, chest thumping hicks, who are not aware.:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_rates_o...

Not only do you pay about half your income to the government, you get nailed with a VAT (value added tax) on most everything your purchase. Gas over there goes on average between $8.00 - 12.00 a gallon (when converted from liters).
So if you want to have this debate on how great these European models are, BRING IT ON...You'll LOOSE every time amongst all the dumb hicks here in the chest thumping US of A. Most all of who like to keep their $$$, and spend it the way they want, and not give it the all knowing big government hacks, such as yourself!
.

Cut and paste my comments, so all your European buddies can get a good laugh from one of those dumb, clueless Americans. Like most of us really care what they think of us.

Mabuse, don't get too upset. Many, many people I talk to are moving leftward or becoming disillusioned with the right. It only makes sense though it seems America moves in around 40 year cycles of lib and con. Since Nixon we've moved further to the right. Now it time for the counterbalance.

Spanky: Very generous? The US ratio of $ spent on war to that spent on humanitarian aims is obscenely gross and shameful. US war spending outdistances the cumulative compilation of the next 15 runners-up. Our "generous" nation's international humanitarian aid as a percentage of GNI shrivels to insignificance compared with true donor industrialized countries. (See below.)

And the reason we should care what other contries think about us, all arrogant chest-thumping aside, is that no country is an island, our national interests are affected by how we are regarded, and the wonderful worldwide reputation we had in yesteryear is now deep down the outhouse hole, inlarge part courtesy of Bush and Cheney.

One might also note that many of those highest on the list below for giving are also highest on the recent Leicester University international study of quality of life and Happiness Index.

Country Aid amount by GNI
Source: OECD Development Statistics Online last accessed Sunday, April 27, 2008

Norway 0.95
Sweden 0.93
Luxembourg 0.9
Denmark 0.81
Netherlands 0.81
Ireland 0.54
Austria 0.49
Belgium 0.43
Spain 0.41
Finland 0.4
France 0.39
Germany 0.37
Switzerland 0.37
UK 0.36
Australia 0.3
Canada 0.28
New Zealand 0.27
Italy 0.19
Portugal 0.19
Japan 0.17
Greece 0.16
USA 0.16

Why should we care what other countries think of us? We are a very generous nation and if other countries don't like us to bad.

kio: you are getting far too much attention, so I will be brief.
A) Interesting how you right-wingers always come up with some version of "Love it or leave it" when your narrow views are exposed. And how your "love it" refers only to your bigotries.
B) I presently live in two countries, thank you very much, mostly the other one, and recreat and consult in several (on five continents), where clowns like you are pretty much laughed at, pitied, or hated. Stereotypically selfish like you are what gives our country a bad name. But I wouldn't know what country to suggest you move to, since you would be useless to them all. Maybe best stay here, where naive fillies like tj fester in common supply and you can b** your way through the next eight years of common-sense government again.

tjncj:
Thank you for the kind compliment.

Kiowamohican, your posts are about the only ones I enjoy reading on this thread.

kio.......The only disingenuous phony named in your posting is George Bush.

Pubsrus, your posts are about the only ones I enjoy reading on this thread.

The latest news bite I head was Susan washed up Sarandon was going to move to Europe if McCain was elected. Of course the SAME nonsense was spewed from Barbra Streisand, Alex Baldwin, George Clooney, and many others in the Hollywood elite in 2004 if Bush were to be elected.

ALL still remain here, of course!
Just proving what a bunch of disingenuous phonies they really are!

mabuse:
I never have claimed to be an "expert" on anything. Your the one who has the love fest with European countries, with the high taxes and mega government social programs. It's rather amusing though, for all you love of them, you still live in the evil capitalist; US of A.

Just move over there; you won't hurt anyones feelings.

Where did I say I had all the answers. So if someone has an opinion different from yours they are a liberal elitist? Plus I don't recall saying anything about being cheated in the elections. The elected government is supposed to do the will of the people. However, it doesn't seem that bush has learned that. You think bush is a leader? That is pretty funny right there! I want a leader who leads as well, not some bullheaded moron who never succeeded at anything! McCain sure isn't the answer, nor is Obama or Hillary.

pubsrus:
Anybody that is glad Bush does what he does is what's wrong with this country. What an asinine statement, just because liberal democrats think they have all the answers and only they can lead the country is pure BS. Elitist leftist always assume they are smarter and know what is best for the country. When they lose elections, it's because they were cheated somehow,or the vote was manipulated, they couldn't have possibly lost because people just didn't agree with their agenda. When they win it's the will of the people. I want a leader that leads, not someone that just wants to be popular and "leads" by poll numbers. Polls have not always proven to be correct.

whybesad--- not whining just stating facts. If and when the pubs control congress again, the same will hold true. If you were truly honest you would say that is correct.

Shutupandfish: Bush merely signed an extension of the current state of the children's health care insurance plan, not an expansion of benefits. Of course that is not going to make headlines. The premise that the bill put forth both Democrats (and some Republicans) would extend benefits to the children of wealthy is preposterous. This just goes to show that Republicans care about "life" up until the the fetus is born, and then it is everyone for his or herself.

As for the timeline for leaving Iraq, the 2006 election was arguably a mandate. With your argument, we'll never be able to leave Iraq. Al-Qaeda will always have Pakistan and Yemen anyhow, there will always be pockets of resistence. That was always the plan, to draw the US into an intractable war in the Middle East, to recruit more into Al-Qaeda and make the US look unpopular. Meanwhile we will just send poor young men and women to die needlessly, billions of dollars down the toilet and bomb Iraq a few more hundreds of years behind the rest of civilization. Mission accomplished.

I see from browsing through these blogs, kio is an expert, among so many other things, on plugged toilets in Europe. Perhaps that refers to the ones he habited, and I can well see why.

Always an excuse for the democrats for not getting anything done. They told us if we had control of the congress that things would change. They had a big plans for their first hundred days and they haven't done a thing. Now your whining because you don't have 2/3 majority. That's different another excuse.

The checks and balances aren't John Q. Public and polls.

Anybody who is glad bush does what he wants is what is wrong with this country. The government has checks and balances for a reason--to reign in idiots who try to circumvent our form of government. If this is allowed to happen we just may as well be a dictatorship; and in bush's case that is what he would want. Whethter you want to admit it or not bushII has never been successful at anything be it business or politics. So you may be glad he does what he wants but if you have any kids or grandkids they are the ones who are going to pay for it. He is typical of all republican elite, you know the ones who just can't stand to be told no just like the spoiled kid in the candy store.

I am glad Bush does what he wants and doesn't base his decisions on polls like slick willy did. I want a president regardless of who he is to do what he is elected to do, not waver and make policy based on polls. If we are going to govern by polls, then lets do away with the office of president and save our selves the grief of the selection process every four years.

McClellan was either a liar when he was the press secretary, or he is a liar now. Depending on which side of the political spectrum you're on is how people will base their judgement. It's funny how liberals will believe what a republican says, only when it fits their agenda.

Not being able to admit you were wrong, and correcting the course, is the fatal flaw of any administration, be it Republican or Democrat. And we are the recipients of that bad judgement.

McClellan was perfectly summed up by Bob Dole. You see people like this all the time in life. They are the lowest forms of life. The have no backbone, and only care about themselves. Notice McClellan NEVER said a word how he disapproved of what was going in in meeting after meeting. Then when he left as press secretary he said "how great of an honor it was to serve for Bush, and with such fine people, blah blah blah".

Now he comes out with this book that is marketed to all you far left wing lunatics; and he'll make a fortune because you will all buy it! For how anti-capitalist you all are on the left, I'm surprised your so supportive of a guy making millions off this selfish stint (and that is all this is about..CASHING IN). I guess as long as it impugns Bush though, anything goes with you guys. What's funny is, a few moths ago you ALL hated this guy just as much as you do anyone in the Bush administration. Now he's your hero.

ya know; for all you far left lunatics who think Bush was responsible for 9/11, is running this evil dictatorship of lies and deception, I'm curious then..How did this book get out? Why didn't Bush just have had McClellan taken out, when he got word of it?

The first hundred days of the democratic congress? I thought this thread was about John McCain's vision of victory. The bar has been set for control of congress. Unless you have a 2/3 majority, you are never going to be able to do anything.

"President Bush does what the generals on the ground in Iraq and Afghanistan tell him not what john q. public thinks."

but ignores Colin Powell, his Secretary of State. Don't lie to yourself: Bush does what he wants. End of story.

The first hundred days of the DEMOCRAT run house.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q_zZKEtoP...

Bob Dole, you mean viagra Bob? He is just mad he never had an administration (and thank God he didn't).

The real John McCain. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GEtZlR3zp...

Bob Dole hit it on the head about McClellan.
http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2008/05/30/...

JSM the health care for the children was a terrible bill at first it would have covered children from wealthy families who could afford health care and children who are already covered under their parents health care plan. He did later sign a children's health plan bill that was more deserving of children that really needed it. That was on the back pages of the newspapers. Telling the enemy when we are going to withdraw troops is suicide. President Bush does what the generals on the ground in Iraq and Afghanistan tell him not what john q. public thinks.

So what do you rebooblicans think about McClellan's book? I suppose he is just making it all up, huh? Come on, let's hear your Attila the Hun take on it.

kiowamohican: " I believe the analysts are wrong on this"."I personally bet this on the future exchanges"
I've heard this before.
code for..I LOADED UP ON MCCAIN...haha

You've just made one of the most obvious political observations, regardless of which side of the political spectrum you fall on. We don't even need to get to that point here because the issue wasn't add ons -- Bush disagreed with the fundamental principal of both bills. Bush refuses to accept a timeline for withdrawal, even though the majority of the public wants the troops out within a year. Further, Bush did not want the health care plan the Democrats were proposing for low income children. So your point is both obvious and superfluous.

JSM:
Why don't you post the entire bill so that people can see why these were vetoed? Congress attaches many other items to a bill, things they know will cause a veto so they can play the blame game, then they can say "see it's the presidents fault". People that don't play close attention to partisan politics, and only get their information from a biased media fall for this ruse.

Well, Bush did veto a bill tying Iraq spending to a timetable for withdrawal (which a majority of the US supports) and vetoed a bill providing health care insurance to children. So, there you have two publicly popular bills vetoed by Bush.

All three candidates aren't very qualified to be President. I guess you have to pick the lesser of two evils. Obama hangs around a bunch of racists. Hillary thinks she deserves it because she was the first lady. Macain is a chameleon who changes his position to please whoever he is talking to.

I guess you could worry about a Presidential veto if you ever gave a bill to the President to veto. Then you can worry about a 2/3 majority.

love that dummycrat babble too. billnewbie is right, you squawk too much!

Gotta love the Rebooblican babble. Attempting to defend the last eight years is a hell of a tough job!! LOLOL

Do they have a 2/3 majority in both the House and Senate? Because that's what it takes to override a presidential veto. I realize that some Republicans are jumping the sinking ship that is the Bush administration, but even that doesn't give a majority to push through major changes in policy.

Democrats have the majority in the house. Nothing a republican brings to the floor will pass. Didn't the democrats say they were going to get all these things done when they had the majority? Broken promises again from the democrats. They have the majority and STILL can't get things done.

Well, I don't know. Swiftboating was o.k. when Kerry was running. I don't see the problem now. Besides, I checked the accuracy of the info before I posted it.

I didn't know that Congress consisted of 100% Democrats now. When did Paulie Ryan convert? Did his pollsters indicate that it would make him more likeable? Also, last I checked, McCain is in Congress (though he doesn't always vote, particularly for veterans' benefits). So, I guess he falls in the low ratings, too, huh?

I love the use of far left wing blogs as a "source". Truly laughable. If you are going to use sources; at least use a REPUTABLE source if you want to have ANY credibility other then with your with your own political side.

Bush may have bad approval numbers (around 30-35%), but it really looks fantastic compared to the GREAT JOB that the Democratic congress is doing!!
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/...
That's right folks 18%. You can pick your nose all day, and get higher approval numbers then that!

I don't doubt that George W. Bush loves his country, but that doesn't make him qualified to be president. And it looks like 71% of Americans agree with me, according to national polls.

At least Macain loves his country.

If you look on Wikipedia and several other sites, you will see that the crashes are authenticated. I believe the UK article you cited from two years ago had a typo.

A. He lost the plane of which he was in control. OK, I'll give you that one but he still lost 4 other planes.
B. He claimed he had a flame out. That was not verified.
C. Yes, I blame him. He is a terrible pilot and not very bright.

Can I get a "count your chickens" comment? I'm feeling a little left out here.

JSM:
I did some more searching on my own, I did find the information, don't know if it is true or not since it is posted on a personal page of a person that obviously is against McCain. That having been said, reading from your list, do you actually blame McCain for someone else accidentally firing a missle into his plane? Do you blame McCain for an engine flame out? Do you blame McCain for being unable to avoid being hit by a surface to air missle?

JSM:
I went to the site you posted, didn't find the information you posted here. All I got was a lot of pop up adds. Did you verify your information, or are you just repeating someone elses opinions?

It was Obama's great uncle, so his grandmother's brother. Still classified as an uncle. You know, probably about the same age as McCain. Speaking of McCain, the flying skill must run in the family:

1 - Student pilot McCain III lost jet number one in 1958 when he plunged into Corpus
Christi Bay while practicing landings.
2 - Pilot McCain III lost another plane two years later while he was deployed in the
Mediterranean. ”Flying too low over the Iberian Peninsula, he took out some power lines
which led to a spate of newspaper stories in which he was predictably identified as the
son of an admiral.
3 - Pilot McCain III lost number three in 1965 when he was returning from flying a Navy
trainer solo to Philadelphia for an Army-Navy football game. McCain III radioed, ”I’ve got
a flameout” and ejected at one thousand feet. The plane crashed to the ground and
McCain III floated to a deserted beach.
4 - Combat pilot McCain III lost his fourth on July 29, 1967, soon after he was assigned to
the USS Forrestal as an A-4 Skyhawk combat pilot. While waiting his turn for takeoff, an
accidently fired rocket slammed into McCain Jr’s. plane. He escaped from the burning
aircraft, but the explosions that followed killed 134 sailors, destroyed at least 20 aircraft,
and threatened to sink the ship.
5 - Combat pilot McCain III lost a fifth plane three months later (Oct. 26, 1967) during his
23rd mission over North Vietnam when he failed to avoid a surface-to-air missile. McCain
III ejected from the plane breaking both arms and a leg in the process and subsequently
parachuted into Truc Bach Lake near Hanoi.
(taken from www.vietnamvetsagainstjohnmccain.com)

BTW, I'm not a liberal, but I guess in your black and white universe nuances don't count.

JSM:
McCain never crashed five planes his father did, do you liberals ever check anything out before you believe it? http://observer.guardian.co.uk/internati...

JSM:
obama DOESN'T have an uncle, his mother is an ONLY child. Spin that into something positive. All the candidates make errors when speaking, but how do you forget that you haven't had an uncle your entire life?

Further, mistaking two concentration camps from over 60 years ago is less worrisome than McCain confusing present-day Iran and Iraq (requiring Lieberman to whisper in his ear), especially when McCain has an itchy trigger finger.

Obama's uncle did liberate concentration camp survivors. So what if it was Buchenwald, not Auschwitz? The point is, his uncle was directly involved in liberating survivors. Therefore, this silly litmus test of machismo can be discharged. If we are going to split hairs, then let us take a more critical look at McCain's so-called "heroics". He crashed 5 planes, at what cost to the American taxpayers? He should have never qualified to be a pilot to begin with. He only did so because his father and grandfather were admirals. If he never crashed the plane, it is likely that he never would have been a POW. Really, that is McCain's only currency in this election.

NVgrf:
You are a fake piece of work, an imposter when it comes to debate. When it comes to babbling, you are the poster child. I'll compare my IQ to yours anytime, and debate you here anytime, but please bring more to the table than one line snide comments. Yes, I am on the right, and you are on the left, and like most people on the left, you think your ideas and rhetorical diatribe IS the only answer. obama will not be president, and I am going to enjoy very much pointing that out to you everytime I see you on any post you make on this site after november, so keep counting those chickens before they hatch, just like the liberals did before the last presidential election. By the way, it was your boy obama that was making false comments about the holocaust, I was just pointing that out to show his ineptitude which will only get worse as the race goes on.

From a political strategic standpoint, McCain really has the advantage in this race (which will be against Obama). On the world exchanges Obama is actually favored, but I don't think that many analysts are looking at it correct. They are putting WAY to much into it being a Democratic year, and equating anti Bush sediment to McCain being a "3rd Bush term". That is laughable, because anyone who follows politics at all knows McCain is no where close to Bush, platform wise. Bush and McCain got so heated at one another in 1999, in the SC primary, that McCain actually considered switching parties, and running as a Democrat. He has also HARDLY followed the Bush line on many voting issues the last 8 years in the senate, and has actually teamed up with some of the most far left members (Kennedy, Feingold, ext). So painting his as a 3rd Bush term simply does not fly with anyone but the far left Democrats who would never vote for him anyway. It is the INDEPENDENT voters who decide this; as in general the far left, and far right cancel one another out.
.
The reason McCain should win is because if you look at the internal polling data (which is what any good strategist does) Obama was really crushed after the Rev Wright incident came out, along with his comments about "people clinging to guns and religion" in small towns. While those comments hurt him some in the race with Hillary, the numbers were much more mis-leading because in the GENERAL voting population they were FAR more damaging. Among independents; Obama lost around 15% support! His national favorability rating dropped from the high 60's all the way down to the low 50's.
*con't

This is VERY damaging; as in general, national races (especially close ones) are decided by your independent voters. Much like the last 4-5 elections, the race will be decided in the BATTLE GROUND states. Obama will carry the left coast (CA, OR, WA and the NE states) while McCain should sweep the south (as the Republicans have the last two decades) , as well as the mountain west states. So it comes down to the usual states like : OH, FL, PA, MO, WI, MI, WV that will be the deciding states.
.
McCain fairs very well in many of the big ones: PA, FL, MI, OH. ALL states that Hillary won, and the internals showed a lot of problems for Obama. If McCain takes all 4 of those states; he is all but certain of victory. .
Remember NEVER put any faith in NATIONAL polls. It's ALL about the electoral map! And from an electoral standpoint; McCain is looking very strong. I have personally bet him on the exchanges (at better then even money). LOTS can change in 5 months, but I think if anything is to change, it will only be McCain getting stronger! He is much more experienced, and would only seem to fair better in the Sept/Oct national TV debates. While watching Obama vs Hillary, I was not at ALL impressed with Obama. Frankly; I think Hillary destroyed him in all of those debates. McCain comes off as a much more polished debater. Obama obviously does fantastic on the campaign stump, and at rallies, but I think is charm and endless talk of hope and change will grow tired; and combined with many of the negative factors on him; his support will drop off.
.
So there is my FREE handicapping analysis of the race; for all you loyal Janesville gazette readers. Hope you enjoyed, haha.

whatdidyousay.....You are a real piece of work. Do you believe that babbling on about the holocaust somehow helps to support your right wing position? And any time you wish to debate or compare IQ's just let me know. I know you and your right wing buddies will enjoy the Obama Presidency!

Whatdidyousay, can we agree to disagree on our political views? I am certainly not trying to make enemies here or be rude. I admit I have made some sarcastic comments, for which I apologize.

apparently in your opinion the only way one has a right to be an American is to join the armed forces. interesting.

This discussion has gotten to be a little too angry for my tastes. I am not trying to "one up" anyone on information, stats, agendas or the upcoming election. I was stating my opinion, that, yes, I am thankful that I have the right to do so. I'm sorry you are mad that I have those rights, but I am grateful for those who fought for them (which includes my family, friends and many many strangers and heroes).

ms_sassy:
Frankly my dear, I don't give a damn what you think either, it is obvious that you don't have a clue, are very inexperienced in politics, and have never done anything for your country, but you are good at one thing, telling people all about the rights you have, yet you have never done anything to earn them. So enjoy your "rights" that others have provided for you. TA DA!

To be clear, I don't care what YOUR political stance is, what military experience YOU have or what YOUR priorities are, Whatdidyousay. I care about what MY families needs, interests and concerns of the future are. I'm sure that YOUR family is what YOU are concerned about. Good for you. Vote the way you feel you will best be served.

also to be clear, I grew up when women were not "welcome" to provide any intelligence, combat or assistance to the armed forces, unless of course I wanted to be a nurse or another "woman's type job"...it wasn't until recently, if you will recall that women and gays were "allowed" to serve. But if you don't ask, I won't tell you I'm a woman....

and on yet another note, I have repeatedly filled you in on my legitimate reservations for not being an Obama supporter. Please stop telling me what I should believe, or who you think I am going to vote for, or what I have or have not done with my voting history because, frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn what you think. ta da!

NVgrf:
I hear what people say, and if I agree, I say so. If I disagree, then I refute it by posting why I refute it. You on the other hand make little snide remarks which accenuates your level of intelligence and debating skills. Perhaps you would do better to post your drivel on the comedy central blog where you would be more at home. Maybe you could get a few pointers from obamas uncle, oops, I guess you can't do that because he must have forgotten that his mother was an only child. Yet his imaginary uncle was there to liberate the Jews at Auschwitz, oops, it was the Red Army that liberated Auschwitz, the Americans didn't do that. Come to think of it, maybe you and obama can do a routine on comedy central the two of you are really funny people.

I know the answer to no. 2... John McCain. Though, to be fair to nos. 895-899, McCain's father WAS a 4-star admiral so I think that might have given him a boost.

"To win the conservative Republican votes so critical in the primaries and caucuses this year, McCain flip-flopped on numerous of his most "principled" stands. Those unfair tax cuts? He now favours extending them. His compassion about illegal immigrants has given way to a pledge to build walls to keep the Mexicans out. McCain has gone from opposing the repeal of Roe vs. Wade to asserting his pro-life credentials. McCain's opposition to federal subsidies for corn-based ethanol, which consumes more energy to produce than it yields, gave way to a pro-ethanol stand as the caucuses in corn-belt Iowa approached."
Toronto Star

Just For Fun...............
1. "We are simply seeking a leader who can take us in a better direction and inspire us to work hard to become greater than we are."
Editorial quote from the Las Vegas Sun. To whom are they referring:
A. Hillary Clinton
B. John McCain
C. Barak Obama

2. Which candidate was ranked 894 out of 899 in college?
A. Hillary Clinton
B. John McCain
C. Barak Obama

Now I know why his name is whatdidyousay. The guy blabs on so much he can't hear others.

ms_sassy:

I don't care about your families military experience, tell me about yours, you are the one posting comments here. Just because you know someone that was in the service, doesn't mean you know anything about the service or military matters. If my father was a brain surgeon, it doesn't mean I am qualified to talk about brain surgery. I said before that you cited ONE person that had an opinion contrary to the action in Iraq and apparently you think that is all that is necessary. I have been in on mission planning prior to action and can tell you there are a number of times someone doesn't agree with all the tactics involved. That was true in all military involvements prior to and including Iraq, not every general agreed with the tactics planned. In every conflict there have been mistakes, and changes were made. The intelligence reports that Bush had to rely on may have been faulty, that does not mean that he lied or intentionally mislead anybody. Do a google search on the number of democrats that said saddam had WMD's even before Bush was elected the first time. It is a fact that saddam had them because he used them against the Kurds in his own country. Also, according to his interagator, he intentionally wanted to make the US think he had them thinking it would help him avoid being attacked. I am sick and tired of people like you that ignore these facts and like to perpetuate the premise that Bush lied. If you think that an inexperienced first term senator has what it takes to lead this country, then vote for him. I will put my money on a experienced veteran, long time senator, that I know will do whatever it takes to keep my country safe. I am no politician either, but I have followed politics for a long time and can do very well in a debate with anyone on the subject. I have looked closely at the candidates in this election and none of them do I agree with entirely, but I won't vote inexperience, and then hope for the best. This mantra of change sounds great, but not all change is change for the best. The times we are living in are precarious to say the least, and this is no time to elect someone for on the job training.

10. Barack Obama has the intellect, natural talent and charisma to communicate effectively to the entire world, bring people together, change the status quo and move our country forward.

11)He can also see dead veterans.

I don't deny he violated sanction after sanction.
I just think at some point you have to ask; "is the cost worth it?" There is no doubt we can win any military battle we engage in. I just think you really have to seriously weight the costs. Your putting a lot of young lives at stake over a country who yes, was defying sanctions, but in reality was no real threat to our security. I'm certainly no bleeding heart liberal, but as an American it just pains me to see our brave volunteers killed, especially over something that I don't feel was a serious threat to our national security.
Someone also mentioned Bosnia, and Somalia. True to my principals, I totally opposed those conflicts; as well. The real unfortunate part of it all is that many of our security agencies (CIA, NSA, ext) have been de-fanged, compliments of the liberals throughout their years in congress. I'm all for using covert operations to take out these dictator thugs, or start a civil uproar/over throw. Funny if you read some of the stories about Castro, and just how many times we BOTCHED taking him out! There is story after story on all the failed attempts our CIA made. One of the funnier ones was to give him a cigar as a "gift" that was tainted with botulism!
.
I'm also not one to say "instead of spending a billion a day in Iraq, we could be using that $$$ for (fill in your social program)". How about not spending the money in the first place! Our Federal budget is spiraling out of control with spending as it is, and massively in the RED. If our debt continues to grow, the interest we pay is going to become a huge burden, and it will keep sinking the dollar further and further, which as you are all ready seeing now has major effects on food and commodities.

The United States Secretary of State is the head of the United States Department of State, concerned with foreign affairs. Reminds me of the line in the Sound of Music: "It says only the names of the children." "It says the von Trapp Family Singers. . .
. . .and I am the head of the von Trapp family, am I not?"

So you are basically saying that Colin Powell, who was the head of foreign affairs, should not have his informed opinion taken seriously, but that the "armchair generals" somehow had a better grip on the situation?

and I believe wholeheartedly that had Congress and the rest of the United States not been lied to about Weapons of Mass Destruction and the other bunk we were fed, there never would have been a successful vote to go to war and Hillary Clinton has stated that many many times.

And you don't have a clue about my political support of Republicans who have a clue and vote with a conscience and listen when issues are raised that I am concerned about and actually keep my family's needs in mind while they are in office; you don't know of my contributions to service men and women, my family's dedication to armed forces, my son's enlistment, my grandfather's service during WWII, my father's service during Korea, my brother's service during peace time or my ability to make a sound and rational decision. I don't need a magnetic ribbon to support the causes that I choose to support. Nor do I appreciate your comments that I have no basis for my reasons.

I am not claiming to be a politician, however I am a citizen of the United States and I don't take that for granted. I choose to use my voting rights in a manner that my family and my country will best be served. I am sure you will do the same.

whybesad.... Israel has "thumbed it's nose" at more United Nations Resolutions than any other nation on the planet. By your logic we should therefore invade them and take Ohlmert out and hang him. Be careful what you wish for.

kiowamohican I don't think we could actually sit around and watch Saddam thumb his nose at the UN resolutions for another 12 plus years. He was playing with us knowing that for 12 years we did nothing he could pretty much do as he wanted and profit from it as we found out (oil for food scandal). I agree with you that there are thugs all over the world but, those other thugs didn't sign a resolution that was to be enforced. If we as a country can't enforce our own resolutions what good are we? He violated 16 of them here is a link.
http://www.state.gov/p/nea/rls/13456.htm...

whybesad, as I've said before, I don't claim to be an historian, an economist nor a commander in chief. I just don't want to be lied to anymore by the government that pays for the damn war that is killing too many innocent people. And for a reason that we can't decide even exists. I'm not an armchair diplomat.

I have a right to voice my concerns as much as the next guy...or is it because I'm not a guy?

I'm just saying: When will someone give me a valid reason WHY we are spending BILLIONS of dollars a day for being in Iraq when our own citizens are going without necessities (and then I am being blamed for being a bleeding heart liberal who only wants to give hand outs and apparently I am the cause of the increase of our taxes)?!

Well, I am one of the few conservatives who has to disagree with this war. The reasons given for us going in are all factually correct, it's just that if you use that as a standard, you'll be in dozens of countries throughout the world. Look at Darfur, and half of Africa, and lots of SE Asia. They are messes, run by murderous, dictator THUGS, just a pathetic as Saddam was.

I think for us to go to war, there has to be a vital threat to out national security, otherwise we'll be all over the damn globe getting our brave men/woman killed as the world policeman. I just never saw it with Iraq. Saddam was so weakened after the gulf war that he wasn't any serious threat to us. He had no WMD's, and his military was weak as ever. In reality, Iran was (is) a MUCH bigger threat to our national security.

The real big problem with this war, is not only has it seen over 4,000 heroic soldiers of ours parish, but that it's simply costing us a BOATLOAD of $$$$. As a very strong fiscal conservative, that is my biggest problem. The last I heard it was around one BILLION $'s per DAY being in Iraq! This is one of the many reasons you have seen the US dollar plummet, which in turn has sent gas/commodities through the roof. Granted the insane spending/give outs by our congress has added to the weakening dollar problem, but this major $$$ involved in the war sure does not h