McCain's '100 Year' Conundrum

re: McCain's '100 Year' Conundrum

ALLEAS — Tue, 26 Feb 2008 03:52:21 GMT

IT WOULD BE THE END OF BARACK OBAMA'S POLITICAL CAREER IF HE WERE TO BECOME

HILLARY CLINTON'S RUNNING MATE FOR THE 2008 GENERAL ELECTION. HE IS MUCH TOO

BRIGHT AND TALENTED TO BECOME BOGGED DOWN IN FOUR MORE YEARS OF CLINTON

SHENANIGANS. IT IS TIME FOR DEMOCRATS TO ADMIT THAT THE THE CLINTONS ARE

BAD FOR OUR PARTY, AND BAD FOR AMERICA, BILL CLINTON PRESIDED OVER THE LOSS

OF THE HOUSE AND THE SENATE, GOVENORSHIPS, AND STATE HOUSE RACES DURING HIS PRESIDENTIAL TENURE. HILLARY FAILED AT HEALTH CARE REFORM WHEN SHE SHUT

VIRTUALLY EVERYONE OUT OF THE DEBATE ON HOW TO FIX HEALTH CARE. SHE DIDN'T

WANT TO HEAR FROM FELLOW DEMOCRATS, DIDN'T WANT TO HEAR FROM DOCTORS,

DIDN'T WANT TO HEAR FROM NURSES OR OTHER HEALTHCARE EXPERTS.

IS IT ANY WONDER THAT THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY DIDN'T VOTE FOR HER HEALTHCARE

INITIATIVE? IF YOU ARE GOING TO INTRODUCE A MAJOR POLICY INITIATIVE OF CHANGE WHICH FRIGHTENS THE AVERAGE CITIZEN, YOU DON'T DO IT BEHIND CLOSED DOORS.

EVERYONE NEEDS TO BE BROUGHT TO THE TABLE AND OPEN DISCUSSIONS HELD.

ALL OF THIS ON TOP OF NAFTA SHOULD BE REASON ENOUGH TO VOTE FOR BARACK OBAMA.

re: McCain's '100 Year' Conundrum

Arjuna9 — Tue, 26 Feb 2008 06:43:40 GMT

I can hardly believe that anyone in this country, except for a few lunatics, would be willing to vote for the man who wants to take over George W. Bush's 30% approval rating and run with it!

re: McCain's '100 Year' Conundrum

COMMON CENTS — Tue, 26 Feb 2008 07:32:15 GMT

Is John McCain and the rest of the Republicans looking thru "rose-colored" glasses in thinking American voters will usher him into the White House in 2008?!?

Do they honestly think that we, the voters, will elect another Bush replica?!?

Why on earth would ANYBODY vote for McCain?!?

Remember Katrina?!?

What about the ECONOMY?!?

Oh, and let us not forget this unpopular IRAQ war!!!!

I'm so disgusted with Repubs that I can't even finish this comment....

re: McCain's '100 Year' Conundrum

maxonhudson — Tue, 26 Feb 2008 07:44:47 GMT

"The United States invaded Iraq under false pretenses without a constitutionally-required declaration of war. Our Founders understood that how we go to war is as important as when we go to war, which is why they vested the power to declare war in the Legislative Branch. The resolution passed in Congress authorizing the president to use force in Iraq said nothing about the U.S. Constitution, but it mentioned the United Nations a dozen times. The United States should never go to war to enforce UN resolutions!

Our continued presence in Iraq is serving as a recruiting tool for al-Qaeda. A recent National Intelligence Estimate found that the U.S. presence in Iraq has had a “rejuvenating” effect on the terrorist group. Proponents of the surge say that we are achieving victory. However, even if the level of our troops being killed has declined, they are still being targeted and the Iraqi government is no closer to stability, meaning that the violence will continue. " -Congressman Ron Paul, Republican

re: McCain's '100 Year' Conundrum

DrZook — Tue, 26 Feb 2008 08:10:25 GMT

John McCain is a man who spent 5 1/2 years in a North Vietnamese prisoner of war camp and yet still thinks war is a good idea. Need anyone look at the man further than that?

re: McCain's '100 Year' Conundrum

DrZook — Tue, 26 Feb 2008 08:15:12 GMT

Dear Alleas,

I did not read your comments and I doubt if anyone else did either.

You see, when you write in capital letters only, it is very unappealing because:

IT LOOKS LIKE YOU ARE SHOUTING.

I am sure that you do not wish to appear impolite and you would like people to read what you have to say.

Thank you.

Yours sincerely,

Dr. Zook

re: McCain's '100 Year' Conundrum

RIPADGETT — Tue, 26 Feb 2008 12:11:40 GMT

Ok folks. Suppose Barrack (or Hillary, they are really one and the same) gets elected and they do move to get us out of Iraq and Afghanistan in 60 -90 days. First, no matter how they want to spin it, that isn't going to happen. 140000 people cannot move all their equipment and people out (while maintaining their security) in 120 days. (Remember this and if I'm wrong, I'll admit it publically.) Of course Barrack/Hillary will spin it that they began the withdrawal within the time frame they promised, not that they completed it that way.

Then while we watch the wholesale murder of those Iraqis and Afghanis that supported and worked for the US (infidels) by the thousands, and watch the different factions fight for power and literally destroy everything that has been accomplished, we can bet the real enemy (Radical Islamists) will be planning and maybe even carrying out their plans to attack the US directly. Then you will begin screaming for the President to do something to stop it. Can you say martial law and the complete eropsion of our freedoms?

I look at it this way as a 32 year Veteran, we can choose a President that will cause those events by withdrawing too soon, or one that will withdraw when it makes sense, not before. I don't like any of the current Candidates, the first two because they will hurt the U.S. and McCain because he would have given the U.S. Away (remember the McCain/Kennedy Amnesty.)

So it boils down to being between a rock and a hard place for me. Vote for one of the pie in the sky candidates that are promising things they can't possibly follow through on, or a candidate that wants to betray America.

There is Ralph Nader, but...what more do I need to say about him.

re: McCain's '100 Year' Conundrum

mayshays — Tue, 26 Feb 2008 17:18:50 GMT

Seriously, does anyone else think that in just the past few months McCain has begun to show preliminary signs of Alzheimer's? Believe me, this is not a humorous stab, nor is it indicative of my political leanings. Watch him speak. Watch his eyes. Then Youtube McCain speaking last year. And please, no nasty comments about my comment (metacomments?)

re: McCain's '100 Year' Conundrum

Arjuna9 — Tue, 26 Feb 2008 17:20:13 GMT

RIPADGETT wrote

"Then while we watch the wholesale murder of those Iraqis and Afghanis that supported and worked for the US (infidels) by the thousands, and watch the different factions fight for power and literally destroy everything that has been accomplished, we can bet the real enemy (Radical Islamists) will be planning and maybe even carrying out their plans to attack the US directly."

It amazes me that people who would judge themselves to be sane and intelligent would use reasoning such as this to justify our continued occupation of a country we illegally invaded, bombed, and occupied. First of all, where is the admission that we thumbed our noses at the advice of our allies and the UN, and committed an extreme act of aggression on a sovereign nation? Where is the acceptance of the TRUTH, which is that we were lied to in order to justify this outrageous slaughter? After we hear that from our leaders, then we can start planning to do the right thing, which is to get the hell out of where we never belonged in the first place. Will there still be a civil war there? Probably. Is our military presence helping? NO! Do the Iraqis want us out? YES! Will leaving Iraq put America in danger of direct attacks on the US? Ridiculous ! (You are actually going to us the same ridiculous argument to keep us there that we used as a justification for the attack?)

No one advocates dumping the mess we created and leaving. We need to do all we can to encourage either other Arab nations or the UN to try to help Iraq become stabilized, BUT WE NEED TO GET OUT !!!!!!

re: McCain's '100 Year' Conundrum

Medge — Tue, 26 Feb 2008 19:04:12 GMT

There he goes again, worrying about the wrong issues. McCain's concern about "convincing 64 percent of Americans who are againsgt the war," should not be the issue. The war has been lost ever since we went into it under false pretenses on March 20, 2003.

Mr. McCain seems to be oblivious to the issues of the economy, the environment and healthcare, among others. He sounds a bit absent minded, although a bit better than Senator Clinton's "sore loser's" rantings about Senator Obama.

re: McCain's '100 Year' Conundrum

Medge — Tue, 26 Feb 2008 19:04:14 GMT

re: McCain's '100 Year' Conundrum

Medge — Tue, 26 Feb 2008 19:04:19 GMT

re: McCain's '100 Year' Conundrum

Hunter S Thompson — Tue, 26 Feb 2008 19:10:10 GMT

"Catapult the Propaganda ...."

McCain has been brainwashed by "W" it looks like! How many more can McCain fool by November?

We are in Orwellian Times, just "Catapult the Propaganda ...." as Bush said.

Do I feel safe after September 11, 2001? Has President Bush shown leadership that makes our country safe?

President Bush botched up Katrina and made another Viet Nam out of Iraq. As Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak predicted, President Bush produced 100 new bin Ladens.

In invading Iraq and attacking its mosques, Bush has assaulted the holiest shrines of Islam. That error resulted from President Bush's ignorance of other cultures. Since Islam is the state religion of huge numbers of followers in many parts of the world, Bush now confronts those followers willing to die in what they conceive to be a defense of their faith.

If Bush had diverted a fraction of the cost of killing those people to understanding and improving their economically-backward nations, it's clear where we in the West would be today: on a forward-looking path to a peaceful future.

I do not feel safe after September 11, 2001, but maybe President Bush thinks I do. In a speech in 2005 about Social Security, Bush seemed to think making me believe him would only take repetitive exercise, kind of like, shall we say, athletics?

"See, in my line of work you got to keep repeating things over and over and over again for the truth to sink in," he said, "to kind of catapult the propaganda."

"Catapult the propaganda ...."

It looks as if McCain ate the bait! 1,000 more years. Now he wants you to believe his propaganda, 8 more years will get you 1,000!

re: McCain's '100 Year' Conundrum

Medge — Tue, 26 Feb 2008 19:13:24 GMT

There he goes again, worrying about the wrong issues. McCain's concern about "convincing 64 percent of the Americans who are against the war in Iraq,should not be the issue to worry about. Winning the war is not the issue, the war has been lost ever since we went into it undder false pretenses on March 20, 2003.

Mr. McCain seems to be oblivious to the issues of the economy, the environment,and healthcare among others. He sounds a bit absent minded, although a bit better that Senator Clinton's "sore-loser's" rantings about Senator Obama.

re: McCain's '100 Year' Conundrum

The_epoch_point — Wed, 14 May 2008 02:30:18 GMT

It's about time the left takes another look at Ronald Reagan and all the other strident anti-communists of the 20th century like Barry Goldwater and Joseph R. McCarthy. After all it was a Marxist Lee Harvey Oswald and a communist Sirhan Sirhan who knocked off the Kennedy Brothers. Now check out my book at Amazon.com

The Epoch Point by Spencer Zimmerman is a religious historical conspiracy thriller that follows evil throughout the existence of mankind, revealing the constant conflict between God and the devil, good and evil. Robert Davis is a young Airman fresh out of Air Force basic training who, after being held captive in China, suddenly finds himself unraveling the most immense conspiracy in history. On duty during the 9/11 terrorist attacks, he soon uncovers hidden facts suggesting Russian and Iraqi involvement. While exploring abandoned military barracks at Kessler AFB in Mississippi, Davis and his friends discover the diary of Lee Harvey Oswald. Suddenly the Airmen find themselves the target of mysterious agents. As the clues surface, an evil emerges powerful enough to rewrite the entire history of humanity, not to mention kill two of his good friends. Before long the conspiracy takes on a supernatural form, marked by lightning, tornadoes, hurricanes, and volcanoes, the wrath of God. Davis finds himself torn by the unbelievable realization that God has a message for him. Nothing could prepare him for the final suspenseful twist the story takes, a Da Vinci style revelation that reaffirms his belief in Christ.