The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

re: Memo to Dems: Don't Dismiss McCain's Military Service

LuLuBelle — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 07:54:02 GMT

Don't try to pretend that Obama did not put Clark up to this. It has been the one constant of the Obama campaign. He has somebody else say something nasty, then he claims not to have known about it and he disowns them.

Frankly, this tactic is getting a tad bit stale and is not fooling anybody.

Obama is a new kind of politician alright - right straight from Chicago and he can roll in the muck with the best of them.

I was a lifelong Democrat but this year I am ashamed of the Democratic party and will be voting for John McCain - a war hero, not Barrack Obama - a real zero.

re: Memo to Dems: Don't Dismiss McCain's Military Service

orion12 — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 09:15:14 GMT

I think General Clark missed the point. So do you LuluBelle. It is true that McCain served his country and endured hard times. He is a hero. It is true also that being a prisoner or a hero does not automatically qualify one for the White House. It is true that McCain is qualified to be president of the United States. It is true that one of his strengths is his service to the nation. With that however comes the analysis of Clark, whether that qualifies him. As Romano said Clark should not have mentioned it because McCain's supporters would not want to listen to that logic. It is true that Obama has not served militarily but that does not disqualify him from being a president. So what we are saying here is there are somethings left unsaid. But again since it is a free society, Clark was within his right to make his comments. (Many people have said Obama is not patriotic. What do you say to that. Is that disrespectful?)

What is not true, however, LuluBelle is your statement that Obama put Clark up to this. That is disrespectful and petty. I think these emotional comments disrupts the objectivity of the article of Romano. Even though the statement by Clark is true, no sensible candidate would support it. So Obama disowned it. Now, you would not tell me that the thousands of McCain supporters who say uncomplimentary things of Obama are put up by McCain? Would you? People are people and in a free society will say things on their minds. Don't forget that neither Obama nor McCain can control anyone but their staff. Even at that, there are at times some utterances that would disturb the candidates. They do not sanction these types of comments that they know can be used against themselves. I suppose we have a right to vote for anyone, but let us not apply the rule to one and not to the other. I suppose that some people may not want Obama, for one reason or the other. Let us nevertheless be reasonable in the way we point fingers.

By the way, LuluBelle, Obama is not "zero". Otherwise would he have come so far? That is a"disrespectful" and "nasty" thing to say. It goes both ways you know!!

I find people who are real democrats all their lives and suddenly will not vote for Obama now must have a real problem accepting him as being different. They must start asking themselves some hard questions as to what they really believe in.

For sure, there will be more of this during this campaign and I am sure Obama will be receiving many more uncomplimentary comments than McCain. We must be sure, however that the candidates endorse such badmouthing before we accuse them wrongly. They both deserve some consideration as they are only trying to contribute to their country even though we may not agree with them.

re: Memo to Dems: Don't Dismiss McCain's Military Service

MariaIsabella — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 13:45:17 GMT

"Frankly, this tactic is getting a tad bit stale and is not fooling anybody."

So are your posts, a tad bit stale. Yeah we get it, you hate Obama, you make that clear in each and every post you write. You're still bitter because he beat your candidate and now you won't ever vote for him, blah blah blah. How many times do we have to read it? We get it. You say the same thing over and over. When Geraldine Ferraro, a Hillary surrogate, set out on her tirade on Obama, I bet you were the first to defend Hillary when everyone accused her campaign of being behind it. The candidates cannot control what their supporters say. You are a silly creature.

re: Memo to Dems: Don't Dismiss McCain's Military Service

4carol — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 14:03:14 GMT

There you go again, another reporter turning the facts. No where did anyone, either Clark or anyone of Obam's people say that McCain's service to our country was not exemplary or that he was not patriotic!!

If you want to talk lapel pins, where was McCain's yesterday??

See how petty that is??

Clark spoke the truth, period!!

If I help someone give birth on the way to the hospital, does that mean I'm qualified to be a obstetrician??? I don't THINK SO!!!

Let's get a grip, people and deal with the issues facing our country instead of inuendo's and personal attacks!!

re: Memo to Dems: Don't Dismiss McCain's Military Service

flamingo123 — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 14:04:24 GMT

So, Mr. Wesley Clark thinks that Sen. McCain years of service as a US Senators and a Vietnam veterans does not qualify him to be a President. and he thinks Sen. Obama is more qualify for his 2 years as a US senators (which he spend most of his days campaigning) and no military service. What a moron!!!!

re: Memo to Dems: Don't Dismiss McCain's Military Service

RO in Reno — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 14:38:48 GMT

I do not understand the flap over Gen Wesley Clarks comments,

First of all it would be an accruate statement that "getting shot down doesn't qualify you to be president," seems to be common sense to me, It did qualify McCain to hero status.

But no one including Gen Clark ever questioned McCains patriotism and that is the conotation the media is placing on the comments.

I am generally a defender of the media but this one is over the top

re: Memo to Dems: Don't Dismiss McCain's Military Service

votenic — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 14:43:07 GMT

The remaining candidates still need to get good vice presidents, and there is a non-biased weekly poll at http://www.votenic.com . The results are worth looking at.

re: Memo to Dems: Don't Dismiss McCain's Military Service

littlewozo — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 15:02:24 GMT

You neglect the statements specifically praising Sen. McCain's heroism and service, but saying that there's a big difference between heroism and strategic leadership

re: Memo to Dems: Don't Dismiss McCain's Military Service

irwind — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 15:03:41 GMT

I'm tired of McCain saying "I know what war is like. I've been there." If he didn't give us a dose of that trite garbage so often it wouldn't tempt others to point out the obvious - that it doesn't qualify one for Commander-in-Chief. I don't hear Sens. Warfner, Hagel, or Kerry trot out their wartime experience as providing an edge in either good judgement or empathetic feelings about war. As long as McCain exploits that experience there will be pushback. His judgement in promoting this war and promoting Ahmad Chalabi's cause at the onset of the war speaks volumes about that judgement.

re: Memo to Dems: Don't Dismiss McCain's Military Service

jayhawker — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 15:06:51 GMT

I didn;t hear anyone diss John McCain's service record or question his heroism. In 2004, however, John Kerry did have his patriotism and his heroism questioned. Many of the same people who are screaming "foul" over this item are the ones responsible for "swiftboating" Kerry. I work for a newspaper, but I think the media is blowing Gen. Clark's comments out of proportion. And I think he made a valid point.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

kalenaj123 — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 15:08:00 GMT

Clark spoke the truth period and again you Andrew as well as all the McCain press lovers comes to his defense. He never dismissed his service or his loyalty or patriotism he just said being a pilot doesn't give you the executive experience needed and it doesn;t. Where were you Andrew when comments coming out of McCain's camp about an attack on America would be good for McCain? Boy that story died real quick but again what can you say when McCain lovers (the press) just can't wait to defend him why does he need surrogates when he has the press on his side.

Come on Andrew start reporting fairly or stop reporting period.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

louis66 — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 15:14:18 GMT

Kalenaj123: As a loyal Democrat, I have to agree with Andrew that General Clark's comments were boneheaded.

The point is that, although true, his comments will appear to many middle of the road voters as questioning McCain's patriotism. If the Democratic Party is ever to win a presidential election again, it needs to take a page from the Republican playbook and learn when to tell the truth, when to play dirty and when to keep its mouth shut.

As Andrew pointed out, telling this truth only highlights that Obama is even less experienced in areas of leadership. Why bring that up?

It's called "staying on message".

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Jose52 — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 15:16:52 GMT

To Mariabella, and others. You cling to the illusion of Obama's capabilities and judgment. The facts are that he has no experience and can read a rolling telepromter. His judgment has made the issues on Rev Wright, Chicago Land deals, .... and on and on. These issues were NOT created by the Right and McCain. This smart man does not have the background and GRAVITAS to be the POTUS. I am concerned that he will be a force to deal with for decades and the donated millions he has in his coffers. He will be the next Bill Clinton for the Dems.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

wgoin — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 15:18:03 GMT

What tells us more about John McCain is his selling out his past ideals in a desperate attempt to become President - no matter what he has to do. He was against tax cuts for the rich - but now he embraces them as he needs their votes and their money. He was against offshore drilling - but now he knows that big oil basically runs this White House and he knows he needs them if he is to win in November. He was a man of integrity but he found it easier to sell his integrity than to stand up for the American citizens. Clark was right. Being a POW doesn't make him fit to be President and more than that - his actions of late make him unfit for the Presidency. It's sad to see he has stooped so low. And, everytime I hear him put Obama down I remember how he wants this to be a civil campaign. Maybe it's time he becomes civil.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

wgoin — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 15:20:12 GMT

To Jose52: And, John McCain, knowing what Rev. Hage stood for went out and actively tried to get his support. Don't spout about Obama. Obama has done as much for this country as McCain any day and is as good a person. He has organized community groups to do better and move their communities forward. McCain will be just another George Bush and we've had more than enough of him!

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

j.n — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 15:20:48 GMT

What is wrong with telling the truth,getting shot down do not qualify one for hero status,just the opposite, being a pow do not qualify or disqualify one to be president.

Looks like we have reached a point where no statement can be made without someone making a big issure of it.

McCain came out of the academy at the bottom of his class,McCain flew a jet into the Pensacola bay,McCain wrecked a jet in Italy by flying to low,it is believed that McCain caused the fire on the carrier Forrest by wet starting his jet that killed one hundred thirty four of his crewmen and injured another one hundred seventy four.

McCain was pulled from the bottom of the lake after he was shot down by the same people that he was bombing,he was tangle up in his chute with two broken arms and one broken leg because he did not tuck his arms and legs in like he should have when he ejected.

I have heard no one make any statement denying McCain's pow status,Obama praises his services all of the time,the hero status is what is confusing,some one explain to me what is wrong with telling the truth,the news media seems to think that something is wrong with telling the truth.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Southern Bell — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 15:21:04 GMT

What a nonsense post.

And what a not surprise to see members of the MSM rushing in to protect their precious Johny (I highly recommend you read Digby's post on this issue).

Gen Clark made a perfect valid and necessary point: McCain's military service does not mean he will be a good leader. That's all he said. Period.

McCain is running as if his military career, and stint as a POW, automatically makes him a better candidate than Obama. And the media is lapping it up.

I'm glad Gen Clark said what he did and refuses to back down. Andrew, Gen Clark's comment and his handling of the "scandal" is what straight talk looks like.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

elyhim — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 15:23:50 GMT

Where was this type of reporting when Kerry was attacked with lies? McCain is pointed at with the truth and it's terrible but Kerry smeared with lies and it was reported on MSNBC without any challenge.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

wgoin — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 15:24:52 GMT

And my favorite - McCain is now standing with the Swift Boat Liars! McCain has stooped as low as anyone can. And that makes him unfit for the Presidency!

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

BDaDDy — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 15:25:22 GMT

kalenaj, did you even read the post? He agreed with the "truth" of what Clark said. But what Romano is saying is that it doesn't make any sense. McCain, nor anyone else, has ever claimed that his POW years rendered him qualified to be President. And Obama doesn't even have any military service, much less "command experience". So what's the point of the comment? Look, flip it around and see if it makes sense: It's like saying, "Working as a community activist doesn't qualify you to be President." Well, of course it doesn't. And Obama has never claimed that it would qualify him. That's all Andrew is saying. As for your theory that the media is on McCain's side: where have you been the last few months? No candidate ever has had such a media honeymoon as Obama has had with the mainstream press. Look at Quayle years ago. He misspells a word (one that had been misspelled for him on a card he was reading) and it's non-stop news for weeks (pre-internet age, I might add). Obama talks of campaigning in "all 57 states" and he gets a complete pass from the media. Now, I'm not against Obama...I could tell what he was trying to say and how he made that mistake. But just because you support a particular candidate, don't let that bias blind you to reality. As a matter of fact, the story about a terror attack benefitting McCain did not die out very quickly. I don't know what coverage you were watching but I read stories for days (and commentary for even longer). Obama is a great candidate but blind and dumb partisanship is exactly what he's fighting against.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

jimw428 — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 15:26:55 GMT

Wesley Clark is a 1st class moron with a classic "little man" complex. To belittle a genuine hero for cheap political points is contemptible. I guess Clark thought all that time on the NATO rubber chicken and cocktail circuit qualified him to be President. Thank God the sensible american people thought otherwise. One of the few positive actions I can attribute to Bubba Clinton, was firing Clark!

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Rome0608 — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 15:36:37 GMT

I am sick and tired of the media playing these games. Just report the news be fair and DO NOT take things out of proportion. I am sick and tired of watching every single news channel distorting what Gen. Clark said. It is clear what the media wants. They want McCain. Again, the media is choosing our president. AGAIn, the media is choosing party politics. AGAIN the media is betraying us the American people. The media does not speak for me. It is clear day by day, the Media is hiding behind McCain's and distorting anything a Democratic candidate says or do.

If Republicans win again, folks be very afraid of our so called Democracy. My only last HOPE is that this time around voters will be SMARTER than the media and will be able to see thru this despicable republican politics corruption. If MCain wins because the media HELP him, we will be in serious trouble and we will not be able to see a change in our country's direction for the rest of our lifetime.

Republicans have been able to win and steal elections with the help of the media. The media did not make accountable of of the Bush's problems, Nixon's, Bush 1 and Reagan. They never held them accountable for ANYTHING they did wrong to us and ont he contrary the media destroyed Bill Clinton, just as they did now to Hillary Clinton. The media HATES democrats and hates the Democratic Party. The hate anything that is works and support us, middle, working class. They want to keeps oppressed.

I am sick and tired of the media. What General Clark said was the truth. I am freaking FUMING RIGHT NOW for how OUR media been over playing this thing. Clark questioned MCain's qualifications not his tenured and service to this country. IF McCain wants us to know every freaking single day that he is filled with HOnor because of his military service, he should stand up and take the heat when his qualifications are being questioned.

MEDIA STOP DOING THIS TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE FOR GOD'S SAKE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

JUST REPORT WHO IS TEH BETTER CANDIDATE AND STOP PLAYING GOTCHA!!.

wHAT THE %#^&$*!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

LYRICOSPINTO — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 15:36:57 GMT

Mr Romano is twisting this, once again - But McCain wears his POW and service on his sleeve . someone is going to wipe their face with it sooner or later. Being a POW - DOES NOTmake you more capable candidate for President . Why don't we just concetrate on this supreme "flip flopper" with his stances and voting record. High minded Christian Conservative, ask the wife he left while having an affair about that? Integrity? Yea Right

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Loden Green — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 15:39:20 GMT

Clark was absolutely correct in what he said. His mistake was in saying it. The McCain-loving media will not allow even any discussion touching on McCain's miltary service. it's a sacred cow protected by the media. Clark took a burst of AK-47 fire (four rounds) in Vietnam, came home on a stretcher and spent time in three separate hospitals. But he returned to duty after he had healed. If anyone has the right to say what Clark said, it is Clark. But he's not the darling of the media that John Mccain is, so Clark gets dragged through the mud.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

j.n — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 15:39:26 GMT

When a pilot keeps his jet in the air and shoots down the enemy jet that is considerd a hero,when a pilot gets shot down and wind up captured that is because he did something that he should not have done.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

marko1965 — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 15:40:17 GMT

No offence but what ever happened to not being taken alive. There was a time in history where a man would not allow himself to be captured and interrogated by the enemy. But I guess I'm just old fashioned and expect too much loyalty and patriotism from the military.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

sjpersonal — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 15:42:42 GMT

I do not understand why Gen. Clark's comments are being taken out of context. Whomever the other man was, he said something about Obama never having flown a flighter plane and never having been shot down. Gen. Clark replied that flying a flighter plane and getting shot down did not necessarily make you qualified to be president.

How exactly is that attacking McCaine's service record? I do not think that either Obama or Clark has anything to apologize for as they did not in anyway insult nor did they question McCain's service record. Just more BS

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

marko1965 — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 15:44:28 GMT

I love the hue and cry when Republicans are hit with cheapshots. They melt like soft lace. Of course when they sling the same crap they expect everyone to suck it up. Boo hoo, if McCain can't take a bit of criticism maybe he isn't ready to be prresident yet.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

kehnn — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 15:48:40 GMT

I understand that the argument was shot down as apolitical attack. To attack it as being a "narrowminded and obvious" is obtuse at best and comes across as an argument that is sympathetic to the McCain campaign.

The argument Clark present is important, obviously, because it presents a counterpoint to all of McCain's blather regarding Obama's lack of leadership experience. If people dismissed the heated rhetoric the McCain campaign used to respond to Clark's point, they would realize that McCain doesn't have so much of this so-called leadership experience either. (Of course, Bush had far less, but that didn't seem to matter either).

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

paulte — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 15:48:41 GMT

I think Wesley Clark's remarks are being taken out of context. McCain seved his nation well and that is a given. But the question Clark raised is a valid one. Is military service a pre-requisite for being Commander-in-Chief? The answer is no. Does it help? Probably but the answer depends on the kind of military service the nominee had. It certainly would help if the nominee had been a general but what if he or she had been a mess hall sergeant? It's safe to say not much.

Moving beyond experience, I think a person can have a kind of strategic mind which would help him or her in being Commander-in-Chief. Presidential candidates are usually pretty intelligent but how many of them have studied military science? Very few unless they have been in the military and so military service definitely helps in applying for the job of Commander-in-Chief IMHO. Clark should have at least admitted that much in McCain's favor but he is an Obama partisan.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

LYRICOSPINTO — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 15:49:59 GMT

Dear Romeo609 - I don't know that the media is in favor of Republicans, but I do see them twist what EVERYBODY says or take it out of context. I aslo believe that they rolled over and played dead when this administration was forging this war and THAT is unforgivable.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Harriold — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 15:52:16 GMT

I served in Vietnam as did hundreds of my buddies. I have great respect for the service of John McCain. But the question remains, how does military service, by itself, make one more qualified to be the nation's leader. And why is asking that question considered by some to be disrespectful of McCain's service. He is no more qualified than I to be President simply because he served in Vietnam. He is no more qualified than millions of others who served honorably to be President. There are indeed other qualities he has which he can bring front and center to argue why he should be President, but the fact that he served honorably does not automatically make him more qualified to be President, and he does a disservice to millions of others to make that claim.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

bopdaddy — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 15:54:41 GMT

as far as I can see McCain's capture was not the norm as many pilots were shot down and evaded capture

I suspect that the reason he refused repatriation early was because he had plans to enter politics and on top of that the Vietnamese knew that he was the son of an admiral and killing him could cause the navy to target their top leadership

pilots don't make strategic decisions and should not be given a pass

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

dorfy — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 15:57:38 GMT

What a lot of fuss about nothing. So what if someone says his POW days don't = presidential experience. They say it all the time aboutObama'spast experience, and no fuss there. Is John McCain's military service somehow sacred and a topic we can only use to lift him to great heights?

What happened to real conversation of the issues? This is an issue because McCain makes it one. He says it is a major reason why he is so qualified to be president. Also - Moyers asked Clark that very question. He only answered honestly. Oops - honesty is only OK when it hits no nerves.

Ridiculous. Double standard. Then McCain's campaign drags out the Swift Boat Admirals etc to have a phone meeting with the press....and McCain says he thought the Swift Boat deal was a lowly approach during the Kerry election run...Double standard & flip flop.

I know people who did every bit as much during WWII or Vietnam, but they never speak of it as a means of getting ahead, don't silence those who don't equate painful war experienes with leading the free world, and who came back to this country to work in regular jobs like most of them did.

Respect is enough. Reverence is not required. Especially from Clark who is also a military man - so knows a bit about being a leader in the military.

PLEASE - stop going on and on about these stupid topics - and lets stay on track with what is happening today - 35 years after Vietnam.

The stock market had its worst half year in 2008 since 1970 (remarkable - right at the end of another war...coincidence?) Maybe there are some big lessons here and some real reasons to see who led us down this path. I think McCain and other "trickle-down" "pull yourself up by yur own bootstraps" republicans are a big part of what has ailed our leadership - a man who admits himself that he knows little about economics and business, but who wants to lead us in a time of extreme economic chaos. Stuff all this military talk, and let's see if we can protect our way of living - not with guns, but with a healthy economy.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

zzxno — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 15:58:17 GMT

Funny how all the articles talking about how terrible it was for General Clarke to downplay John McCain's experience leave out this part of the quote:

"Because in the matters of national security policy making, it's a matter of understanding risk. It's a matter of gauging your opponents, and it's a matter of being held accountable. John McCain's never done any of that in his official positions. I certainly honor his service as a prisoner of war. He was a hero to me and to hundreds of thousands and millions of others in Armed Forces as a prisoner of war. He has been a voice on the Senate Armed Services Committee, and he has traveled all over the world. But he hasn't held executive responsibility."

This was John McCain's 'The Emperor has No Clothes' moment. He has predicated his campaign very solidly on his experiences as a war hero and POW, which to be honest isn't necessarily relevant. It says something about his character, but it doesn't say very much about his ability to handle the complex neuanced sort of problems that he will fact as commander in chief.

Also, that quote about his commitment to soldiers being too strong to attack, does that take into account his opposition to the new GI Bill? John McCain may have been an advocate in the past but he sold that down the river for a chance at the presidency. Attacking John McCain on his record is fair game and there are some legitimate questions there that need to be answered. Although it's much harder to do when people in the Media deliberately misrepresent and distort the attacks. The only reason that this is a dangerous path to take is because reporters have already decided the narrative (war hero vs. up and comer) and any news that detracts from that narrative is not greeted kindly.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

marko1965 — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 15:59:05 GMT

After McCain allowed himself to be taken alive he helped make Vietnamese propoganda films. How would it make America look if he was elected President and then these films came out? Americans are tired of being laughed at by the rest of the world.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

just jerry — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 15:59:29 GMT

McCain was has been perhaps the most willing person in Washington to be non-partisan and readily has called Bush on the poor way the Iraq War has been handled, on the use of torture and why it doesn't work to gain actual intelligence, on the failure of the Bush administration with the Katrina aftermath, etc..

The military record of importance is what McCain learned about humility while a totured captive, a humility not often shown, but much needed by politicians. He is pragmatic, he works well with others, listens, and brings both sides together much more so than most politicians because he isn't about being that self important and arrogant politician like George W. Bush or perhaps even Barack Obama who merely pretends to be "above the fray" and a new kind of politican.

I'm leaning toward voting democrat for all offfices but president. I beleive that McCain can work with a democratic House and Senate and bring about an end to polarized politics. Obama is a pretender who hasn't developed the necessary humility to actually lead in a non-partisan manner.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Jose52 — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 16:00:36 GMT

To wgoin. I will try to deal with facts. Your comments show your emotions and your defense of Bambi's weaknesses. As a organizer and state senator, his voting record is nothing to defend and he has voted present are hard issues. He is a savy Marxist politician with character flaws and poor judgement. He has supported abortion where babies have no rights and supports terrorists (and Supreme leftists) that have rights because they were caught overseas battlefields. And you missed my compliment that BarcK..arck will be around for years. My emotions may have gotten the better of me, but this man can not be compared with McCain. The media is in the bag for Hussien and the Dems are following him blindly. May God Bless America.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

BCinColorado — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 16:05:00 GMT

What's missing from this debate about McCain lacking executive experience is that...neither does Obama! In fact, Obama doesn't even have experience leading coalitions in the Senate. The one committee he leads hasn't even held hearings. He is just there to pad his resume.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Rome0608 — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 16:11:22 GMT

If we are going to talk about record, (some of you has raised Obama's record on the senate), yes, Obama is young and is a junior senator, he is considered the most liberal, bla bla bla.. every four years we here the same thing.. I thought the most liberal senator was JOhn Kerry and prior to that, Al Gore, was the most liberal.. so, let' consider mccain's bipartisanship (wink wink) record, here is a guy that has VOTED 95% OF THE TIME WITH BUSH.

yeah.. that is called bipartisanship, leadership and great vision..

Sure.. Americans are payign attention and the republican party and the media will NOT DISTRACT US NOW.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

cowen123456 — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 16:30:54 GMT

hmmm, lets see. A guy who's an expert in fixing car brakes is more qualified to fix a car oil leak? or a guy whos an expert in baking donnuts more qualified to fix an oil leak? hmmmmmm, I say I give the brake expert the shot first!

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

uuforyou — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 16:36:15 GMT

McCain is running on his military record.

McCain made his military record an issue when he ran on it.

Now McCain wants to cry foul over it???

Clark never once questioned McCain's patriotism.

Clark only asked how getting shot down qualifies him to be president.

How EXACTLY does getting shot down qualify McCain to be president?

McCains military record is NOT sacred, so he needs to quit acting like it is!

McCain may be a war hero, but that does NOT qualify him to be president.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

ploughman — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 16:36:49 GMT

Hmmm...McCain swift-boated? Now what would motivate anyone to do something like that?

Clark was probably correct, but it's too fine a point and not in an area where Obama has any advantage anyway.

Though the McCain people overreached by treating Clark as an Obama surrogate.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

janforhilary — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 16:43:12 GMT

ZZXNO,

Get your facts straight before you talk about the GEI Bill. Many reasons to vote against it. Neither Obama or McCain have executive experience. Obama is the old style Chicago potilican. Take a good look at your person of interest.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Driver of wagons — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 16:43:26 GMT

UPDATE: Since a lot of you are sending words of support on here for General Clark, VoteVets.org started a petition......... (http://ga3.org/campaign/petitionclark)........ where you can sign to thank him, and tell him to keep it up. VoteVets.org will take the petition to General Clark, personally. Also, it's important to sign, so we can show the media that we've got his back.

GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: Because in the matters of national security policy making, it's a matter of understanding risk. It's a matter of gauging your opponents, and it's a matter of being held accountable. John McCain's never done any of that in his official positions. I certainly honor his service as a prisoner of war. He was a hero to me and to hundreds of thousands and millions of others in Armed Forces as a prisoner of war. He has been a voice on the Senate Armed Services Committee, and he has traveled all over the world. But he hasn't held executive responsibility. That large squadron in Air- in the Navy that he commanded, it wasn't a wartime squadron. He hasn't been there and ordered the bombs to fall. He hasn't seen what it's like when diplomats come in and say, 'I don't know whether we're going to be able to get this point through or not. Do you want to take the risk? What about your reputation? How do we handle it-?'

-it's publicly.' He hasn't made those calls.

So, in short, General Clark respects John McCain's service, calls him a hero to millions, but notes that experience doesn't make him qualified to be Commander in Chief.

General Clark called McCain a hero to millions for his sacrifice. And, that's a pretty big statement coming from a man who, himself, left Vietnam on a stretcher. But, facts are facts:

* Senator McCain's service and experience, both as a POW and as a Senator apparently hasn't infused him with a dose of good judgment.

* Senator McCain's experience hasn't led him to realize that the war in Iraq and it's continuance has empowered and emboldened Iran, and destabilized the region.

* Senator McCain's experience hasn't caused him to recognize that we're losing ground in Afghanistan, and Osama bin Laden is still out there, plotting.

* Senator McCain's experience didn't lead him to support the 21st Century GI Bill -- he opposed it. It didn't even make him feel the need to get back to Washington to vote on this -- one of the most important veterans' bills this Congress. He twice skipped votes on the GI Bill, to fundraise.

* Senator McCain's experience didn't help him empathize with troops are overstretched and overdeployed, when he voted against the bipartisan Webb-Hagel "Dwell Time Amendment," which would have given troops as much time at home as in the field.

Senator McCain is running on his experience, saying it makes him ready to lead right away. By doing so, he is asking people to look at what that experience taught him. By looking at Senator McCain's positions and votes (or lack of them), it seems that experience has not given him the right judgment on important issues of our time. And, while we should all honor Senator McCain's service, that doesn't mean we should necessarily honor it by putting him in the White House to take up George W. Bush's third term.

So, General Clark is 100 percent absolutely right, and he should not back down, These are important times, and deserve a blunt and honest debate

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Corsair977 — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 16:49:24 GMT

If you achive the post of "commander" be it commander of a ship, plane or squadron of ANYTHING in the military, it's because you were chosen for your leadership abilities. The peers who assign commander status to an individual know that they are placing a large responsibility on the person they bestow that status to. Also, the individual taking on that responsibility, must know that in his being, he has the ability to live up to commander satus and standards.

MaCain has done this.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

MariaIsabella — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 16:52:48 GMT

LBJ had military experience and look at the mess he made of his handling of the Vietnam war. When Kennedy died, there were only 16,000 military advisors in Vietnam. By the end of 1968, he had 550,000 soldiers inside Vietnam. They were being killed at a rate of 1000 a month. Now let's take a look see at FDR. He had no military experience, and his handling of WWII was nothing short of brilliant. Point being made, military experience does not make you more qualified to be Commander in Chief, especially in a time of war. Enough said.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

tklmeelmo — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 16:56:46 GMT

I agree with alot of the other comments in this forum. This is much ado about nothing. Mr. Clarke is one of Mr. Obama's supporters, not even a member of his campaign. Every one of Mr. Obama's supporters does not always speak directly for him, so attacking him for what Mr. Clarke said makes no sense. It also sets an unreasonable expectation -- is Mr. Romano going to write similar articles every time one of Mr. McCain's supporters attacks Mr. Obama's record, presumably when Mr. Romano doesn't agree with the attack? I seriously doubt it...

I do agree with Mr. Romano on one part, there are much better areas for Democrats to attack John McCain.

I also have to say that I'm a bit disappointed at Mr. Romano. In the past, I've thought his analysis insightful and right on track.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

dbaur — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 16:59:37 GMT

I have yet to see anything that qualifies Obama for President, a Year in and no accomplishments, not pledging allegiance, Marxist posters in his campaign office. I don't think McCain is much better though, but when posed with a choice of two evils we pick the lesser of the two. I will vote based on:

1. Ability

2. Track Record of what candiate has actually accomplished (which means Obama gets 0)

3. Oil and Gas solution - I have not heard a short time solution, only long term solutions, so niether has a clue. Why is Iraq not providing this, why are we not drilling. What are the short term solutions that actually WORK.

4. Obama is not impressing mature educated people when he says "you can't run your AC on 72 and you cannot drive an SUV" - Okay dumbo, why not, I thought I was in U.S.A? What a Control Freak

5. The Border needs to be secured

6. Talk (that Obama is good at) is Cheap -No meat behind it as he has never done anything good or even been aprat of Policy. 1 Year in Washington and did nothing....soooooo, why should I vote for him? His speeches are jsut that, they all talk and talk, but never do anything.

7. No Raising Taxes (Understand Obama, all you want to do is increase taxes with no results...GET REAL)

8. Immigrants need to be legal, and must pay tax, and back tax.

I have yet to hear anything on McCain running on his military record, it just gives him added perspective.

For all those Obama lovers, name something he has done good for the country? As far as I am concerned he has a zero score in accomplishments, and man is he communistic\marxist in the way he preaches things. Go Ahead, name something?????

9. Media is controlled by Liberals and they get proven as liars all the time, so I guess I won't get any fairness out of the media for the most part.

I don't like either one, but McCain at least doesn't want to raise taxes, doesn't tell the American People what they HAVE TO DO, doesn't lie, is Open about things. Obama changes daily.

I don't vote for good speeches, I vote for action, and he has never taken any. Histroically taxes get worse when Liberals are in Office. so......Why should I vote for Mr No Accomplishments Obama?

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

thehappyamerican — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 17:02:24 GMT

General Clark! How does a military officer advance when the education and experience is denied him due to years being in captivity?Mr. McCain could not become an Admiral conveniently or without handi-cap and you know that!

It seems failure to become an Admiral or General due to his lally -gagging in Hanoi has you fairly jaded and compels you to comment on this former military professionals' potencial today only in prejudicial terms. And ignoring his accomplishments since he left the US Armed Forces.

Which brings me to how do YOU know so much about the practicel factors for POTUS, General Clark? You are a straw expert on such matters and following a straw candidate!

With such followers as you it's clear Obama would be very challenged to successfully lead a small party of girl scouts acrossed a small city park to a picnic table stacked with cookies and ice cream, even with a map in his hands!

Frankly,I would prefer the President of our nation to have no military experience as the founding fathers wrote the job discription to be a post a civilian could full fill!.Even a draft dodger! Or draft dodgers' wife!

Or had you not noticed that? General?

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

klavigne — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 17:06:03 GMT

Now let's take a look see at FDR. He had no military experience, and his handling of WWII was nothing short of brilliant. Point being made, military experience does not make you more qualified to be Commander in Chief, especially in a time of war. Enough said.

MariaIsabella, Ever hear of the Rough Riders or San Juan Hill??? Don't spout off at the mouth unless you know the fact, which you do not appear to have correct. FDR became vice president BECAUSE he was a military man, get your fact straight next time you want to sound smart!

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

seadu — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 17:06:29 GMT

No one on either side of this race should be questioning anyone patriotism. Neither candidate would be where they are if they were not patriotic. As honest as Clark's comments were I don't believe they were appropirate. McCain on the other hand keeps throwing experience comments out at Obama so he gets what he gets. McCain has been advertising on websites that have fostered and perpetuated untruths and rumors about Obama. Then McCain says his campaign didn't know about it? B.S.! Stop whining and crying foul all the time McCain. We appreciate what you have done regarding your service to this country, but stop playing dirty then whining about it when it gets thrown back in your face.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

bfjones666 — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 17:07:25 GMT

The funny thing is that Bob Schieffer had a question of Clark based on the premise that Obama had not been in a fighter plane that had been shot down. His correct answer was that being in a plane that got shot down did not qualify you to become president. As a general, he is without a doubt entitled to his opinion and i happen to agree with it. No one becomes qualified to be president because he was or was not shot down in a fighter plane. The hub-bub over this is ridiculous and now that McCain claims this is a wink and a nod thing, he is proving that he has lost his bearings once again.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Driver of wagons — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 17:07:32 GMT

I don't know where this reporter or any other reporter with any kind of scrupples sees what General Clark said about McCain is a rub on his service record. As a matter of fact if you read the entire statement as it was said he praises McCain for his service to the country. He just doesn't think that should be a qualification for McCain to be President. In these times of terrible uncertainty in our country just being a POW and X Military Service Man is not good enough reason to be POTUS. This contorversy is not going to go away until McCain opens all of his service records and that of all the service records of the Vietnam War that where sealed with the passing of the McCain Bill. And that is really where and what this is really all about. If we don't know the whole story then there really isn't any story and everything that has been said is just a fabrication not of the real McCain and we will never know who John McCain really is. If you are jusr following McCain with blind faith and believing what MSM is shoving down your throats about this issue (and dare I say what some would call the "liberal media" I guess the press's reaction to this article proves there is no such thing) you are a fool in your own skin and derserve everything you are not going to get.

OPEN THE RECORD, THE REAL RECORDS. and lets put this to rest once and for all and get on with the real business of electing a President who will lead us back to a nation of freeholders and away from what we have become, a nation of beholders

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

pastafar — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 17:14:12 GMT

McCain did not necessarily demonstrate leadership to get to where he was in the military. A long line of family admirals was able to put him where he was despite fairly lackluster academic performance.

This is the only issue McCain has and the media is ignoring the real issue here. Clark didn't dismiss his service, in fact he complimented it. He simply stated, factually, that on the only issue for which McCain claims expertise, he is not actually that strong. His understanding fo the situation in the Middle east is beyond embarrassing. He should know the difference between a Sunni and a Shiite by now and his tendency to blow with the wind is profoundly disturbing. Nobody has any idea, least of all McCain, what he actually supports.

All we have seen is that, on the rare occasion that McCain actually votes, he always sides with Bush and Bush has been wrong about almost everything. That is enough for me. Obama wins.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Greygolla — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 17:14:49 GMT

McCain endured, he also persevered in his military tradition. So he is a hero and he has some legislative experience. Maybe even some leadership skill. What this means to me is that he is a one trick pony. He failed to learn anything from his experience, It only confirmed his mindset. He is bringing up his sons in his tradition. He is a hawk and has an agenda. He doesn't care what he has to say or do or to what peril he subjects us in accomplishing his end. The most patriotic , heroic thing he could do at this point is withdraw from the race. We don't need an Algeria.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

kammie — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 17:17:44 GMT

"Posted By: klavigne (July 1, 2008 at 1:06 PM)

klavigne -You have the wrong Roosevelt--Teddy was the Rough Rider and San Juan Hill. FDR was never vice president, but he was the Governor of New York and Secretary of the Navy, which still certainly helped his resume.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

landonmkelsey — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 17:19:53 GMT

patriotism is NOT the issue...doing the job is the issue!

Just because you were a war hero (and McCain was), it doesn't mean you will be a better president!

It could mean you'd be a worse president!

Politics brings out the fool/liar in seemingly everybody!

McCain will be another 4-8 years of GOP bush and cheney!

He is another robot!

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

t_mccluskey@charter.net — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 17:20:33 GMT

Heaven forbid say anything remotely off color about any republican and you are trashed in the media but they in turn can say any damm thing they want even when its fabricated. obamas this or that unpatriotic , a muslim, etc ,for years the republicans have been successfuly underming regulations many of which were first put in place by a mostly bipartisan goverment to stop exactly what is going on now from media monopolys to pollution controlls for the good our country , all its people even the world. now after big business lobbyist have been successful at shredding these regulations now look what the trust us deregulation of american business has gotten us mercury in the water,toxins in the air, media monopolys, 1% people controlling 90% of this contrys wealth,unaffordable health care,tainted food supply's and the list is goes on.and on ,and on, John mccain a hero ? a man of honor ? straight talk express ? to by this *** again just How Stupid and affraid are we ,really? every time i hear a person, a democrate appologize for caring about some one other than themselves , or something more than thier bank accounts i want to scream and beat the nerds up my own damm self . we dont get everything right either but to appologize to these people for anyting ? who's applolgizing for the dead and wounded in Iraq ?

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

landonmkelsey — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 17:23:46 GMT

FDR sold all his stock the day before Pearl Harbor!

Kammie right on except the Roosevelts were as all politicians rats/liars

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

amendment2man — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 17:24:38 GMT

talk is certainly cheap.

Time in a prison camp with abusive captors: not cheap physically and emotionally

getting back to normal life without emotional handicaps AND becoming a prominent member of congress: Priceless

What Mccain has been through has no equal from the obama side. even if he is sometimes hot tempered as rumored; to go through that experience and remain whole and prosper as he has certainly says a lot for his fortitude and character. obama cannot even begin to compare himself in ANY way.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Prt10 — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 17:25:59 GMT

My issue with the whole situation is that McCain cannot have it both ways. He cannot use his military experience in his campaign if people cannot ask questions.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

scottbatson — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 17:34:03 GMT

I think being a POW makes a person mentally unstable. I also believe that John McCain has been brainwashed to unleash a nuclear attack on his own country. The trigger is this Vietnamese jailer who has come out of no where to say he would vote for McCain. It is a grave mistake to elect McCain. I believe if elected no one in this country will be alive within four years.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

justasoldier — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 17:34:50 GMT

I find the tenor of these comments, whether pro or anti-McCain, to be quite disturbing in terms of the future of our country. I am a military officer. I support John McCain. But if Barack Obama is elected president, I will support him because he will be my President. I will not lampoon him and it should go without saying that I will carry out his orders as commander in chief.

I frequently lament to my friends the fact that the American statesman has been replaced by so many political hacks. Reading these posts, I wonder why I should feel a right to expect more of them than I do of my fellow citizens. There is a lot on the line for our country. You can be a bulder or one who tears down. It's your choice.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

jftl6y — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 17:35:44 GMT

I'm shocked and horrified at the uninformed comments some people are making on this board about Sen. McCain's capture. Most of these statements are so wrong it would take me days to show refute them completely. Statments such as "McCain ALLOWED himself to be taken alive" or that his capture was somehow atypical ("others evaded capture" why couldn't he?) and that he refused early repatriation as a political stunt can be only described as incredibly naive and ignorant, not to say insulting to everyone that has worn a uniform and stood in harms way, not to say to those who have been imprisoned as POWs. Certainly those making these remarks have never served, as they clearly do not understand the concepts of duty and honor or the POW code of conduct.

The Vietnamese treated these men with incredible brutality and systematically tortured and abused their prisoners in deplorable conditions. The fraternity-hazing grade "torture" of Abu-Ghraib was nothing compared to what these men endured. What would you rather have? Lynndie England put you in a naked pile and laugh at you, or have your arms bound behind you while you're hung by your wrists, pulling your shoulders out of their sockets, AFTER your captors broke all of your teeth? To suggest that somehow John McCain welcomed this or wanted to prolong his stay to curry political favor is simply unbelievable. If he wanted a political career so badly, he would have skipped military service entirely and gone to law school and on to running for office.

Regardless of whether Senator McCain's wartime service qualifies him for the presidency (I personally can think of no greater test of a man's character than refusing early repatriation under those circumstances), please do not insult Sen. McCain or other ex-POWs who endured that treatment by suggesting that somehow it was their choice or fault to be placed in that situation.

I also take note of the great irony that the Vietnamese who violated the Geneva convention time and time again are quite closely aligned politically with the Democratic nominee. Isn't communism wonderful?

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

wgoin — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 17:37:24 GMT

To Jose52: Well you can try to deal with facts but first you would have to know some. Obama is no more Marxist than McCain is. What an ignorant comment. If we speak of character flaws and poor judgement, you would first have to start with John McCain who started sleeping with his current wife while he was still married to his former wife. Up until the last four years McCain was pro-choice. When he decided he couldn't run for president as a Republican with that stance, he changed his mind. So he now is anti-abortion but he has no problem with our country bombing and killing over 400,000 innocent men, women and children in Iraq. How does he explain that? In a war we had no business starting. Obama is not pro-abortion - just pro-choice. He has never supported terrorists and leftists - this is just Karl Rove lies and has been proved as such. You are right - Obama cannot be compared to McCain, thank goodness. He hasn't sold out everything he believes in in a desperate attempt to get to the White House. He hasn't stooped to slander or endorsements by the Swift Boat liars. He hasn't tried to belittle McCain. And, your use of his middle name just shows how ignorant and racist you are. You are trying to get less educated people to look at that name and be afraid instead of realizing that this country is made up of many different ethnic backgrounds and that a person is what they do and how they act - not their middle name. I feel sorry for ignorant people like you who have no facts but prey on people's ignorance and fears. This is the way George Bush has led this country for the past 8 years and only the ignorant want more of the same.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

akennedy — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 17:38:29 GMT

Your wrong as usual!

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

mcleodmn — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 17:39:12 GMT

The only thing that makes McCain a hero is the fact that he served in the military. But if that's the case then he's just like HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS of other heros. Getting your jet shot down makes you an inept pilot. Getting tortured is awful, but does it somehow make you smarter? No. Does it give you leadership experience? No. Foreign policy experience? Nope. Does it cause psychological damage? Of course. Post Traumatic Stress Disorder? Yes. His old and frail body could have a multitude of health issues as a result of getting tortured. Does that make him a better candidate? Get real. I know a lot police officers and firemen who are a hell of a lot more courageous than this little weasel. Can they run for the Presidency?

And as far as his health? He'd be the OLDEST president EVER. He's had cancer on MULTIPLE occasions. He crashed a jet, and he was tortured for years. He can't lift his arms which means he probably needs help getting dressed in the morning. And we are considering letting him take the helm of the entire free world without knowing what his medical chart says? Hope he picks a great VP.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

scottbatson — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 17:44:21 GMT

To jftl6y: I've only seen one Vietnamese communist endorsement so far and it has come from McCain's jailer supporting McCain.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

wgoin — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 17:44:23 GMT

To LuLuBelle: McCain was not a hero - he was a POW. There are many war heroes alive today and they deserve that recognition - he does not. He served his country and he deserves credit for that but that is as far as it goes. And, talking about putting people up to saying bad things - McCain is a pro at that. When I see Democrats raving about McCain I know one thing. They are voting based on race but are ashamed to admit it. Obama is the better of the two candidates and has run his campaign with dignity and grace - something McCain keeps talking about even as he tries to belittle Obama. McCain is a bitter old man who thinks he is entitled to the White House because he blindly supported the dufas we have in there now. I am ashamed of "Democrats" like you. You are not a Democrat - you are a racist. It is clear from your post. Oh, just so you know, I am a white 40+ well educated woman.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

jftl6y — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 17:48:11 GMT

mcleodmn, you prove my point. You make his getting shot down sound like he got lost on a training exercise. Inept pilot? Let's see you evade Soviet anti-aircraft fire and live.

Congratulations - by labeling McCain as inept for being shot-down, you just insulted every service man or woman who has ever been shot down, sunk or wounded in combat. The other team plays to win too, and labeling a member of this country's armed forces as inept for getting hit shows a degree of stupidity that should be criminal.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

easleyt — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 17:49:31 GMT

I know dissing a service member, especially when I did not serve myself brands me as unpatriotic but I have a hard time digesting the notion that being a POW automatically makes you a hero. Let's face it, he was shot down and captured, hardly a tribute to his flying and/or evasive techniques. And when McCain turned down the offer to go home I just brand that as, well, stupid.

Maybe to enlighten me, someone who has served can recite what the military expects POW's to do. Evade capture, attempt to escape, etc...

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Jurr — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 17:51:38 GMT

Only about 10% of McCain's military records were allowed to be viewed publicly. For someone who is all about transparency, he sure hides a lot of information like Military & Medical records (Locked in a room with the records for a short amount of time with a select group of people does NOT count as disclosure). If he is going to base all of his foreign policy & military qualifications on War Hero status, then I want to see the entire movie, not just a snapshot.

People that graduate at the bottom of the class (bottom 6%) don't get to fly jets. McCain did. Pilots with poor disciplinary records and a bad attitude that lose 3 different jets during non-combat maneuvers don't get to keep flying. McCain did.

McCain was a screw-up for a good part of his Navy career who just so happened to be protected by his Daddy, a 4 start Admiral. McCain was described as a cocky & reckless pilot who didn't believe the rules applied to him- and that sentiment was expressed before McCain decided to run for president. McCain opted to take retirement disability and left the military when his Dad died- was it time to move on or did he lose his immunity?

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

wgoin — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 17:56:40 GMT

To Jftl6y: What an ignorant comment - "the Vietnamese who violated the Geneva convention are aligned with the Democratic nominee" . Where do you come up with such nonsense? There is absolutely nothing to indicate this anywhere. Why do Republicans just decide to make up lies and think everyone is going to believe them? What next - was Obama also responsible for the fall of the stock market? I'm sure that will be your next ignorant ploy!

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

mcleodmn — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 18:00:35 GMT

jftl6y - If we found a dog limping away from a plane crash, then we threw it in a cage, beat it, tortured it, and starved it for years, then after this dog had cancer a few times we waited until the end of the average dogs life expectancy, would you adopt this dog to protect your home and family? No. We would have it euthanized.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

CMJNM — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 18:00:42 GMT

I guess 25 years of being in the Senate doesn't count as experience???

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Thevail — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 18:00:44 GMT

John McCain isn't running for President..he's running for Commander-in-Chief.

Totally aside from his military experience, which, although exemplary, has NOTHING to do with being president.

He has ZERO economic policy.

He has ZERO educational policy.

He has ZERO healthcare policy.

Oh yeah, just like EVERY OTHER REPUBLICAN..he doesn't give a rat's ass what happens IN America..just what he can get up to and make a profit off of OUT of America.

Wake up real Republicans..neo-cons and right wingers have hijacked your PARTY and incidentally your COUNTRY and are crashing them into a war. Don't worry, I'm sure someone will put up a nice memorial..and then not actually catch the one's who did it.

Where's Bin Laden now? Any bets he "releases" a tape just before the election, or the Bush administration says it "foiled" another terror plot? Charlie Black says it'll be "GOOD" for McCain.

Just think that through.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

jftl6y — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 18:02:30 GMT

Article IV of the POW code of conduct: If I become a prisoner of war, I will keep faith with my fellow prisoners. THAT MEANS YOU DON'T TAKE AN EARLY OUT UNLESS EVERYONE GOES HOME AT THE SAME TIME! It's not stupid, it's what keeps a military unit cohesive. You can Google for "POW Code of Conduct" and get the rest - it may enlighten you.

As for McCain's attempts to evade, in his egress from his Skyhawk, he broke both arms and a leg and lost conciousness, then was set upon by an angry mob who beat and bayonetted him. How would you fare under such odds?

I was once priviledged to hear a speech by a USAF general who was once a guest of the Hanoi Hilton. He talked about his initial capture and said that after his ejection, he parachuted into some trees. Eventually he got out of the trees and his parachute harness and drew his .45 and stepped into a clearing. A man armed with an AK-47 appeared in front of him. The another at his rear. Then two more on either side. Then three more to the front. That's 9 adversaries armed with AK-47s in close proximity. Know how many rounds a 1911A1 Colt holds?

Anyone who suggests that these men should have done more to evade capture has just played too much Halo 3. There's no magic recharge pellets lying on the ground to power-up, or weapons and ammo lying on the jungle floor. The horrors of the Hanoi Hilton were well known among air crews and these guys would do anything to avoid capture.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Joe Z. — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 18:08:43 GMT

dbaur, in response to your questions:

1) "For all those Obama lovers, name something he has done good for the country?" (technically, this is not a question but it does have a question mark at the end). Well, for one, since you seem to care about taxes: Senator Obama has opted out of the taxpayer money for his campaign unlike the Marxist McCain. Also, he has helped the inner city poor in Chicago, publicly opposed the Iraq War before the invasion (i.e. when it was unpopular to do so), helped reform welfare and the death penalty in his home state, added health insurance for 20,000 children, worked bipartisanly to dismantle Russian WMDs, among other things.

Personally, though, I care less about past accomplishments and more about stands on issues. Look at Abraham Lincoln who is regarded as our best president: eight years in the Illinois legistature and two years in Congress a decade before he was elected president. Just about the same amount of experience as Barack Obama. Meanwhile, James Buchanan, perhaps the worst U.S. president had over 30 years experience in political office, more than any other president before or since.

2) "What are the short term solutions that actually WORK.(sic)" About the only short term solution is, as Senator Obama has proposed, to close the Enron loophole that speculators are exploiting that drives up the cost of gas. Of course, Obama's tax cuts will help alleviate the burden of the high price of gas, too, but it won't lower prices. Personally, I have been driving slower (down to the speed limit) and have noticed big savings.

McCain's voting with Bush 100% of the time this year, up from 95% last year, shows that he will continue current trends which would be even more disastrous for the USA.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

CMJNM — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 18:09:14 GMT

If you are in the service and you put yourself in harm's way to protect your country, then yes, you are a hero. McCain is the first person to tell you that that is not what his campaign will be based upon. It will be based upon his experience in government. Obama's history of gathering signatures for petitions before he got into politics not so long ago, is not experience. People are voting for him just because he's a black man. Everyone wants to show how 'forward thinking' and how non-racist they are by voting for him, yet they know nothing of his policies. If he stood for ANYTHING that I agreed with, I would vote for him. But since I think he'll ruin this country if he's the President, then I will definately not be voting for him. By the way, he's the only Senator that refused to sign the "Born Alive Infant Act" that said that if an abortion goes 'wrong' and the baby survives the abortion process, then some medical effort should be made to save the baby. All the Senators agreed, except for Obama. He indicated to let the baby die.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

jftl6y — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 18:10:05 GMT

I can see I'm fighting a losing battle here. One poster (mcleodmn) suggests that we take wounded POWs and euthanize them like injured dogs. Another (wgoin) hits me up for suggesting that communism and liberalism share political views, yet one poster (scottbatson) actually suggested that McCain has been brainwashed to nuke the United States and that we'd all be dead in 4 years and no one says anything about it?

I'm actually not enthusiastic about either candidate - McCain doesn't represent my politics anymore than Obama does, although I'm a little more sure that he won't tax me out of my hard-earned wages. My point was that there are a lot of stupid comments going around here that suggest John McCain should have been some sort of super-hero who was impervious to Soviet SA-2s, the NVA, and sadistic captors.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

VAChris@FC — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 18:10:23 GMT

Mr.Romano, the problem with you guys in the press is that you JUMP on stories, and in so doing miss the fundamental underpinnings and the REAL import of it all. NO ONE is dismissing Mccains military record. I'm sure if you'd bothered to hear the General's whole message you'd understand that much. The general simply said, after much acknowledgment of Mccain's service, that such service and being shot down - does not qualify him for the presidency. That he'd not had the wartime leadership responsibility of having to wrestle with ordering bombs to be dropped etc. I did not read your piece simply because the title turned me off. And I might add, the General also clarified that Senator Obama is not running on his military credentials as Senator Mccain. Am glad some of your readers understand the meaning of the General's comment. DON'T join the Mccain spin.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Galasso — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 18:11:55 GMT

In June 1999 NATO Cdr Wesley Clark made the egregious error of ordering the British Army to attack a train carrying Russian soldiers whose objective was to seize the airbase in Pristina. The Brit refused and told him that he was going to start WWIII for Gen Clark, who then ordered the Americans to hit the train. Before the order could be carried out, the train had passed. Wesley Clark's hot-headedness got him into trouble with the SECDEF, Cohen, the Chairman of the JCS, Shelton and the Pentagon to the point where he was relieved of command two months early and retired. Generals Shelton and Schwarrzkopf stated publicly that Clark has integrity and character issues. So here we have the vainglorious Clark calling into question the suitability of John McCain's service as preparation to be the Commander in Chief while failing to acknowledge that Obama's claim for suitability is that his grandfather served in WWII. On the surface, it looks like the Democrats are throwing Clark out front to taunt the wolves and lead them into an ambush while Obama starts the apologies and half-truths about how much he respects McCain's service - kinda like withdrawing a damaging comment in court after the other side objects. This is an effective tactic, but in reality I think it is all about Wesley Clark's narcissism and lack of judgment. He really blew this one.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

MariaIsabella — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 18:13:39 GMT

"MariaIsabella, Ever hear of the Rough Riders or San Juan Hill??? Don't spout off at the mouth unless you know the fact, which you do not appear to have correct. FDR became vice president BECAUSE he was a military man, get your fact straight next time you want to sound smart!" (post by klavigne)

Ahahaha, klavigne, you are a complete idiot!!! YOU better get YOUR facts straight. The Rough Riders and San Juan Hill have to do with TEDDY Roosevelt, not FRANKLIN Roosevelt. Exactly what President did Franklin Roosevelt serve under as Vice President???. My God, are you really that stupid lol. I don't need to "sound smart" next to the likes of you, you just made me look like Einstein ahahaha.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

wgoin — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 18:17:31 GMT

To Jftl6y: Clearly you have no knowledge of what Democrats stand for - I'm an Independent and I actually bothered to find out. I will not down McCain for his service in fact I said he served admirably. However that does not make him a hero. There are a number of true heroes out there who deserve that title. And, I find fault with anyone who suggests that makes him qualified to be President. And, if you did your homework you would know that the only people Obama is talking about changing the tax rate for is those earning $250,000 or more. Now if that is you - then your taxes will be raised. For everyone else there will be a somewhat lower rate than what they now pay. And, it is really not raising the taxes on those above $250,000 - it is just not continuing the Tax Cut for the Wealthy that Bush initiated and that McCain opposed until he decided to run for President - how fitting. Warren Buffet - one of the wealthiest men in the U.S. said the tax cut should have his name on it and that he wants no part of it.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Murray Rizberg — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 18:18:15 GMT

Dear Mr. Romano,

Please do the citizens of this country a huge favor and get yourself out of the field of journalism immediately, if not sooner. This article is just the latest in the subjective, lazy style "journalism" that has become the norm for the industry. Here is a small list of big mistakes in your mostly terrible piece:

1. You immediately declare that dismissing Senator McCain’s military service is “simplistic” and “counterproductive.” On neither term are you correct. General Clark’s analysis is not simplistic; in fact, if anything, it is way too complicated for the general public to understand, in part because the public has been dumbed down by years of being served articles like this from alleged journalists such as yourself. General Clark is correct when he asserts that serving at one level of the military does not prepare one the same way it does for one who has served at another or various levels of the military, as General Clark himself has done – which is how he would know this (duh!). The simplicity of this situation is attributable to Senator McCain, the Republican Party, and the lazy hacks in the mainstream media, all of whom would have us believe that Senator McCain’s service in Vietnam does automatically qualify him to make better judgments regarding our military. Any analysis of McCain’s voting record and policy beliefs over the last six years, however, clearly proves this belief to be gravely mistaken. On the matter of how it is counterproductive: how would you know it is so soon after the comment has been made? It was just made two freakin’ days ago! The “Swift Boat Veterans for [cough] Truth” didn’t have such an immediate impact, and their false campaign impugning the noble service of Senator John Kerry was most assuredly effective, if you recall (even if you dismiss Senator Kerry’s idiotic decision not to respond to the charges for such a long time). Mr, Romano, you are simply and absolutely in no position to tell the public whether this criticism is effective or ineffective at this point in time.

2. Later in your article you state that questioning Senator McCain’s qualifications for the White House based on his military record is “so narrow-minded and obvious that it doesn't do any damage at all.” Obvious? If it’s so obvious, then why hadn’t anybody raised the question until this past Sunday? Granted, I don’t (and can’t) read every single article written about this election or Senator McCain, but up until General Clark’s appearance on television this past Sunday I had never seen anybody ask that question in such blunt terms before. I’m sorry, Mr. Romano, but that assessment of yours is astoundingly inaccurate. Furthermore, I must repeat regarding the second part of that sentence: how do you know it does no damage at all after two days? You don’t and you can’t.

3. You accurately called the McCain camp’s response to General Clark’s comments “ridiculous,” but then failed to mention what allows these comments to become “controversial” in the first place: the mainstream media’s preference to reporting gossip over reporting facts and raising legitimate questions (not to mention its bizarre habit of playing every whine from the Republican National Committee over and over again until it is beat into the heads of the general public like a Top 40 pop song). My personal favorite is the last line from this paragraph, where you wrote with complete obliviousness, “Today, Obama wanted us to talk about his patriotism. Instead, we're talking about this.” Apparently it never occurred to you that you yourself, along with the rest of the mainstream media, chose to write about this and, thus, make it a “controversy.” All we can do is smash our heads into a brick wall and wonder why the mainstream media is more interested in addressing Senator McCain’s feigned outrage over this non-“swiftboating” than it is the actual substance of the comments themselves. Do you care to answer that question on behalf of yourself or your colleagues, Mr. Romano?

4. In the last paragraph of your article, you quote Ben Smith, who said without a hint of historical perspective or irony, “McCain's heroism is too well-established, and a climate of respect for soldiers too strong, for attacks on his service to do anything but backfire” (emphasis added). Uhh, where was this “climate of respect for soldiers” back in 2004 when the mainstream media ran a country mile with the false “truths” about Senator Kerry’s Vietnam service? This character assassination does not merit even one mention from you or anybody else? Oh, wait – Senator Kerry was never shot down, so therefore his service was not nearly as honorable, thus all but inviting to have itself maliciously questioned by Republican operatives and their cohorts in the mainstream media. Now that I think about it, however, there was at least one mention of “swiftboating” already: CNN’s Rick Sanchez inaccurately labeled General Clark’s comments about Senator McCain – which in no way questioned the honesty of McCain’s account of his service in Vietnam as the Swiftboat Veterans did to Senator Kerry’s accounts of his service in Vietnam – as an attempt at “swiftboating” Senator McCain. Again, the assertion goes unchallenged. Is there any logical reason Rick Sanchez is not only allowed to make such a dishonest comparison, but to make it uncontested? How irresponsible is the mainstream media, anyway?

To be fair, Mr. Romano, you did get a number of things right in this article, such as the fundamental relevance of Senator McCain’s having served in Vietnam. After all, this would make him the oldest first-term President in our nation’s history; after Ronald Reagan’s seriously confused later years in office, age and its effects on analysis, decision-making and physical abilities – whether it is politically correct or not to admit so – is a fundamentally relevant issue in this (or any) election. The problem with this article – and with so many other articles in the mainstream media today – is that it simply does not address the more relevant issues, nor does it correct many of the misleading and/or hypocritical comments made by many of the parties involved in this faux controversy. For instance, you might have mentioned that Senator McCain, in his efforts to bludgeon Senator Obama for the comments of an entirely different person, wheeled out none other than one of the Swiftboat Veterans for [cough] Truth himself, Bud Day – all the while claiming to be taking the high road in this non-controversy. That seems like it would be a fact worth mentioning, that is, if one were foolishly to assume the mainstream media has any interest in fairness.

For the sake of the public and our deteriorating national fabric, Mr. Romano, you must put up a better effort in reporting the news. Either that or get out of the business entirely.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

cbretana — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 18:19:47 GMT

kammie,

It was teddy Roosevelt who was in the rough riders, not FDR... It's so easy to check this stuff yah knoiw, before posting something. The rough Riders fought in May 1898, in the spanish-American war. FDR Was only 6 years old. FDR Was never in the military. And although FDR's management of WWII was in many ways exemplery, I wouldn't tout him as a sterling example of military leadership. He was the one, for example, that put thousands of Japanese-Americans into Internent camps, where, by the way, conditions were much much much worse than current conditions are at Guantanamo...

And all of you attempting to address this issue by way o fwhether what he said is true or false completely miss the point. Of course being shot down does not qualify you to be POTUS. NOT being shot down doesn't quailfy you either. Let's Leave aside for the moment the fact that it's what McCain's service, and his behavior and choices during that service, what they say about his CHARACTER that matters. Leave that aside, in this issue what matters is how mean-spirited and, well, just downright rude Clarks comments come across.

It's like if I said that Obama's being close friends , and associating, with a 60s radical like Ayers doesn't qualify him to be president... Sure that's technically true... duhhhh! Such a comment would say infinitely more about the person making it than it does about Obama...

Clarks' comment says infinitely more about him than it does about McCain. And, to the degree that it raises questions about whether Obama was hehind it, it also says more about, and damages, Obama - morethan it does McCain.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

jftl6y — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 18:35:19 GMT

To wgoin: I do know what the Democratic Party stands for - it stands for redistributing wealth in the name of "fairness" with an activist government solving all of our problems with government programs, led by an elite few who tell the workers what's best for them (a la the pigs in "Animal Farm").

As to my income, depending on the year (I am a consultant) I do make more than $250,000/year and what that entails is lots of travel away from my family, with many long and stressful days to make that money. When I hear an Obama commercial on TV talking about how he'll cut taxes for "workers" it annoys me because it implies that I do not work for my living. I am certainly not one a member of the idle aristocracy out of an F. Scott Fitzgerald novel, and I don't know anyone who is. But the Democratic party is great at creating class distinctions where none exist.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

wgoin — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 18:39:34 GMT

To cbretana: Unfortunately what McCain has done in the past eight years says volumes about his character - not to mention his affair with his current wife while he was still married. His backpeddling on every issue from tax cuts for the wealthy, being pro-choice, offshore drilling - we could go on and on. His changing his stance just to get Republican votes and especially those of the far right tell me volumes about his character and his desperation to be President. He served admirably in the military but - Clark was right - that doesn't qualify him to be President. And, his change of policy whenever it gets him votes definitely makes him unqualified.,

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

matrixnov — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 18:40:56 GMT

Funny thing is as an ex-Navy guy that was on aircraft carrier duty that I would never vote for a Navy pilot for president...great guys; however, they're way too aggressive and trained that way to handle the subtelties and nuances of being president...the common joke amongst us enlisted was u could always tell a Navy pilot as they walked down the passageway as they're testes jangled and made the unmistakable "brass balls" clanging noise that we heard were part of flight school, inserted upon graduation...

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

wgoin — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 18:44:22 GMT

No jftl6y, it doesn't. It just means that there will be fair laws for all - not just laws and programs that favor the wealthy - a la the past eight years of the Republican party. I also make more than $250,000 a year but I know that that does not entitle me to a tax cut for the wealthy. The only class distinctions made in this country have been made by Republicans who delight in deciding who should get breaks and who shouldn't. But, clearly you are a typical Republican who thinks you are much better than others and you deserve more. How sad. Some of us know that most people work hard for what they earn, not just those of us who make quite a bit. And, we think there should be some fairness in taxation. And we all know that the "trickle down" economy never seems to trickle down.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

556justice — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 18:45:16 GMT

easylet,

jtfly16y refered to article IV of the code of conduct, the appropriate article is III: "If captured I will continue to resist by all mean available. I will make every effort to escape and aid others to escape. I will accept neither parole or special treatment from the enemy." John McCain isn't a hero because he served, he is a hero because of how he served, I would challenge many of the people on this site to question whether they would be able to sacrifice themself, as McCain did, for a greater cause.

As to VAChris, McCain's military service is part of who he is, as is the twenty plus years in the senate. How does that compare to Obama's esperience? Clark was attacking and trying to marginalize McCain's service to our country. No one has argued being shotdown and held as a POW prepares your for the presidency, all they have siad is that it shows his character. Obama has no comparable ability to demsonstrate his steadfast dedication to a cause.

If you believe that the Obama campaign did not have a hand in this you are truly delusional.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

speckelbelly — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 18:48:25 GMT

JUST BECAUSE McCAIN WAS IN THE SERVICE DOES NOT MEAN THAT HE IS PRESIDENTUAL MATERIAL OR THAT HE CAN LEAD THE COUNTRY ANY BETTER!

MY PROBLEM WITH JOHN McCAIN IS THAT HE IS WAY TOO OLD,AND HAS FLIP FLOPED WAY TOO MANY TIMES ! MY VOTE AND MONEY GOES TO OBAMA!

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

matrixnov — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 18:51:07 GMT

556justice writes: "Obama has no comparable ability to demsonstrate his steadfast dedication to a cause"

dude, he graduated Harvard Law School and was the editor of the Harvard Legal Review, and yet he returned to Chicago to the 'hood...what more comittment do u need from the man, everybody doesn't commit to a cause that's worthwhile by jumping on grenades...as a matter of fact, there's probably a fair number of military personnel who feel like after this last 8 years of abuse they should've been comitted for insanity in believing the lie's of these rogue elements calling themselves American's, yet doing everything they can to squelch freedom, and trample the constitution even to their last few days...kinda reminds me of Rove's 1000 year Republican party line - hmm, wonder where he stole that line from anyway...yeah think about it...

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

wgoin — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 18:56:49 GMT

To 556justice: And, if you believe John McCain isn't behind the lies about Obama being Muslim and supporting terrorism, you don't know anything. McCain is using Karl Rove tactics all the way including hiring the Swift Boat Liars to do his dirty work. McCain is no knight in shinning armor. Ask his first wife. And, he has flip-flopped so many times he must be dizzy by now.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

jftl6y — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 19:01:48 GMT

wgoin: I am not a Republican. Far from it as I do not believe government regulation of personal freedoms to be any more palatable than heavy government regulations on finance and commerce.

I do not think I am "better" or "deserve" anything - I've worked hard for what I earn and have taken considerable risk to get where I am. Fair is a really slippery word, and if you think our tax code is fair in any form it has taken in the last 50 years, you are sadly mistaken. It's so convoluted and complex that no one can figure it out, yet we hurl accusations like "tax cuts for the wealthy" around. Some years I have paid more in taxes than the average US salary, even with these "tax cuts for the wealthy" so forgive me if I thought I was already paying my share. Did you donate your extra money from the Bush tax cuts to charity?

Here's a little parable that I like about how our tax policy currently works - tell me if a flat consumption tax wouldn't be fairer:

Let’s put tax cuts in terms everyone can understand. Suppose that every day, ten men go out for dinner. The bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:

The first four men - the poorest - would pay nothing; the fifth would pay $1, the sixth would pay $3, the seventh $7, the eighth $12, the ninth $18, and the tenth man - the richest - would pay $59.

That’s what they decided to do. The ten men ate dinner in the restaurant every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement - until one day, the owner threw them a curve (in tax language a tax cut).

“Since you are all such good customers,” he said, “I’m going to reduce the cost of your daily meal by $20.” So now dinner for the ten only cost $80.00.

The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes. So the first four men were unaffected. They would still eat for free. But what about the other six ? the paying customers? How could they divvy up the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his “fair share?”

The six men realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody’s share, Then the fifth man and the sixth man would end up being PAID to eat their meal. So the restaurant owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man’s bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.

And so the fifth man paid nothing, the sixth pitched in $2, the seventh paid $5, the eighth paid $9, the ninth paid $12, leaving the tenth man with a bill of $52 instead of his earlier $59. Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to eat for free.

But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings. “I only got a dollar out of the $20,” declared the sixth man who pointed to the tenth. “But he got $7!”

“Yeah, that’s right,” exclaimed the fifth man, “I only saved a dollar, too . . . It’s unfair that he got seven times more than me!”.

“That’s true!” shouted the seventh man, “why should he get $7 back when I got only $2? The wealthy get all the breaks!”

“Wait a minute,” yelled the first four men in unison, “We didn’t get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!”

The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up. The next night he didn’t show up for dinner, so the nine sat down and ate without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered, a little late what was very important. They were FIFTY-TWO DOLLARS short of paying the bill! Imagine that!

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

wgoin — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 19:08:38 GMT

jftl6y: Actually, I donated a great deal of it as well as a great deal of my time. My parents always taught me that when you get a lot - even when you work hard for it - you have a responsibility to reach out and help another learn to work their way up. I know that is a foreign thought for you but I actually like it. I've heard the dinner stupidity before. Again - Republican crap. And, for someone who doesn't want government interference you must be livid about the last 8 years when our constitution has been raped by this administration. But, of course you're not. It served you well. And, I'm guessing you are just thrilled about the three oil companies who are going to benefit from doing business in Iraq - an option that wasn't opened for bid - just granted to Bush and Cheney's buddies.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Angela40 — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 19:12:32 GMT

You would be right except for the fact that it is McCain and his campaign that is trumpeting his service as if it's a qualification for president. He was not a war hero. He wasn't even an exemplary sailor. He crashed several planes. Why is it that his campaign continues to assert that he has an advantage over Obama on national security? The nation is less safe because of Bush's policies that McCain continues to support. Clark's point is that if McCain is going to make those assertions, then they should be tested. I also think that someone who was in a POW camp for years and was tortured could be mentally compromised. Listening to the guy talk, he sounds crazy. And he can never remember what he said from one day to the next. Why is it not OK to question his mental stability when he wants the most important job on the planet?

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Murray Rizberg — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 19:14:24 GMT

There's one fatal flaw in your parable, jftl6y: the four poor men would never - NEVER - eat at the same restaurant as the six wealthier men every single day. Please try again.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

cbretana — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 19:20:31 GMT

wgoin,

You can make an argument one way or the other about what McCain's behavior says about his character... I'd be happy to go there on any specific issue you raise. You might be surprised to see where I stand on that front when the discussion is about character judgments, or what X or Y implies about McCains character... There are both positives and negatives there, (though I doubt we would agree on which were which)

But it is my point (and on this point, at least, it seems we agree) that it is indeed a candidates character , and what their behavior and chocies (or what we know about them) imply about their character... that matters.

i.e., The facts about Rev Wright and all we know about that have nothing to do with Obama's qualifications to be POTUS, it has to do with our judgment about his character. The fact that he seems willing lately to move towards the center, for example, hinting that if circumstances and military advice dictate otherwise, that he would not live up to his campaign promises to precipitously withdraw from Iraq, I take as a positive sign... A willingness to admit mistakes (and the intelligence to recognize when circumstanes have changed) are a sign of good character....

But this forum is about Clark's comments, which were, as I said, only rude and demeaning, and say nothing, absolutely nothing, about whether McCain is qualified or not to be POTUS.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Galasso — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 19:21:15 GMT

I served in the Army Airborne beginning in the 1960's and through the 70's with many NCO's and officers who were prisoners of war in WWII, Korea and later Vietnam. They were some of the most honorable people whom I have ever met. They didn't distance themselves from the young troops and had a confidence and wisdom that made them special in the eyes of all of us. One of the things that has been forgotten in discussions about how someone's POW status would affect their judgment in the Oval Office and that is how many of those POWs died in captivity. In 1973, the Joint Casualty Resolution Center in NKP, Thailand sent a C-141 Starlifter to Hanoi to recover the remains of the men who were buried in the cemetery behind the prison. There were a lot of them. I think that John McCain's time as a POW should be off limits. There are some things that the rest of us are not qualified to voice an opinion or attack unless we have been through it. Wesley Clark is an oily political wannabee. We can all be thankful that he is not going to reside in the Oval Office.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

wgoin — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 19:28:12 GMT

to cbretana: I can argue about character regarding McCain any day. He constantly talks about his wanting to run a clean and civil campaign but he is always trying to get in belittling remarks about Obama. And, if we want to continue on the character issue we, of course have to discuss McCain's affair with his current wife while he was still married to wife #1; his courting of Rev. Hage when he knew full well - at least everyone else did - of his radical and disgusting remarks and stances on issues like Katrina; Gays; the Holocaust, etc. All of these things bring into question McCain's judgement as well as his "good character," The fact that he is behind trying to malign Obama's character by using 527's - "I can't control what they do," and complaining about the financing of the campaign when he first broke the rules on campaign financing, all of these raise questions about his character.

Again, I will say McCain served this country when he was in the military. Again I will say it does not qualify him to be President of the United States. And, that is all Clark said. He was not rude or demeaning -just stated the facts.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

jftl6y — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 19:30:03 GMT

Far from it wgoin - I think that locking people up and throwing away the key without due process of law is completely un-American, and the cloak and dagger stuff about warrants and wire taps gives me the heebie-jeebies. We can't win our fight against terrorists by turning into them. Even if we kill them all, if we've sacrified our principles and freedoms they still win.

My problem though is that I do not know what the solution is to keep our country safe. It's easy to point fingers when some wrong is being done, it's harder to develop a solution.

And FYI, my parents also taught me to help others and I choose to do so by helping people directly. If I see you broken down by the side of the road I'm going to help you out. But they also taught me to stand on my own two feet, so forgive me if I expect everyone else to hold up their end of the load as well.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

olderwiser — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 19:35:14 GMT

Bush now has eight years in the presidency. Eight years experience. He's still an incompetent president. So much for experience in a candidate for president. Mc Cain has experience flying fast jet airplanes and experience in confinement in a prison. Many people are released from prison every day in this country and we can safely say that imprisonment doesn't qualify one for president. I would now like to hear any theory, no matter how wild on the preparation for the presidency that flying a fast jet airplane affords. A war president is simply a president who is in office when war breaks out. Anybody who gets into the office is a war president during war and a peacetime president when we are fortunate enough to be at peace. We have Generals and Admirals to wage war. The president needs to know how to ask them to fight. Example: "Go fight the war". That's all it takes.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

wgoin — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 19:53:01 GMT

jftl6y: Helping someone to reach their full potential by teaching them ins not giving them a hand out it is helping them learn to stand on their own feet. Plus, I don't think children should suffer if their parents don't make the effort - the children can still learn and sometimes just need role models.

To me just continuing with the same policies we have had for the past eight years - as McCain plans to do - is no way to address the issues we have now. So, I'm ready to bring in new thinking and someone who has not tried trashing the competition. Obama stands for working to get out of this horrible mess we're in and I'm going to give him a try. We've seen what the Republicans have to offer - just more of the same.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

wgoin — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 20:04:33 GMT

schlang: my what an intelligent argument. And, Barack Obama is a graduate of Harvard and was the first black to head the Harvard Law Review. Plenty of brains there!

The difference is that McCain plans to continue Bush's failed policies and doesn't see diplomacy as any way to interact with others!

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

cbretana — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 20:07:18 GMT

wgoin,

Clearly, you can go on ad nauseum about McCain all day, any day. Wgas? So could I, as I could about Obama. And, if your most recent posts here are representative, (in most cases, the points you make are not even wrong), I could make a better case against McCain than you could, and a much better case against Obama...

But again, this forum was about Wesley Clarks' comments... If you use every issue, and every forum, to simply rant, you lose credibility and become uninteresting.

And as to Clarks' comments, they were rude and demeaning... If I said

"Obama's having had Rev Wright as a mentor and father figure does not make him qualified to be president" then that is absolutely true in exactly the same way, but it's rude, and demeaning, and irrelevant... .

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

cbretana — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 20:12:12 GMT

Yeah, just any idiot can fly supersonic jet fighters.. Yah know, when you use personal invective and ad hominum attacks, at least try give them a modicum of credibility. Otherwise, ja- know, people might tend to think you are speaking wioth a trace of, say, emotional bias?..

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Isabella38 — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 20:13:04 GMT

Uh schlang, he graduated 790th in the class of 795 students, which doesn't exactly make him a brainer. He didn't do much better in high school. He spent most of the time in both places causing trouble because he had a problem being told what to do. The only reason he was even admitted to the Academy was because daddy and granddaddy were Admirals, which also explains how he even got into pilots school. With his grades, he would not of otherwise.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Isabella38 — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 20:18:40 GMT

Oh, and cbretana, he wasn't too good at being a pilot either considering he crashed 5 planes before being sent off to Vietnam. Without his family connections, I doubt he would of been allowed to continue flying with his crash record.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

cbretana — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 20:18:47 GMT

and oh, by the way, they don't even let idiots INTO military flight school, in the Navy or the USAF, - and the wash out rate (from among these extremely talented and intelligent men and women), is a lot higher than it is from Harvard.

and you know, I like people who "have a problem being told what to do" They don't make good followers, but they make good aviators, and greate leaders.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

cbretana — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 20:29:21 GMT

Isabella,

Do you know anything about these 5 incidents? If you did, you wouldn;t bring them up... I do, and none of them reflect anything at all in any way negative about John McCain. Several of themm, in fact, reflect high;y on his character and his behavior.

It's how a man (or woman) behaves under stress that says the most about his/her character... And if you take the time to learn the details, and not just stop reading as soon as some factoid supports you preconceived biases), these incidents give us the opportunity to learn something about McCain's character...

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

cbretana — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 20:36:38 GMT

Isabella, one of those 5 planes was the A-4 he was shot down in, because he went BACK OVER the target a second time, becaue on his first pass, the target was obscured by weather.

A second "lost aircraft" was because he was sitting in his jet on the USS Forrestal, off the coast of VietNam, waiting to take off, when a rocket on another jet accidently fired off and set a third aircraft on fire... His aircraft along with several others were destroyed, and over a hundred sailors died, in the ensuing conflagration, that lasted for several days before it was finally extinquished. McCains actions them, and during the remainder of the three days the aircraft carrier was on fire also speak volumes about his character, and I think not in the negative way you would prefer...

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Isabella38 — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 20:42:50 GMT

"they don't even let idiots INTO military flight school, in the Navy or the USAF,"

Oh please, during Vietnam when McCain served, the draft took any and everyone, even those who were given an option of jail time or the military. The standards were a lot lower then. They needed bodies to replace those coming home in record numbers in body bags. The military could of cared less about what their IQ was.

The military teaches you to follow orders, so if those joining have a problem with being told what to do, they best ought to find a different career. I suppose if all those brave young men and women in Iraq decide they don't like being told what to do anymore, maybe they should just stop and head home since you have a problem with those in the military doing what they are told.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Jill from Florida — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 20:45:57 GMT

So if McCain's military experience doesn't qualify him to be Commander in Chief, how does Obama's lack of any military experience make him a more qualified candidate?

Clark, did you shoot yourself in the foot? Or, a better comparison would be, Did you think you were Cheney and shoot Obama in the face?

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

vakosh — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 20:51:13 GMT

Same old, same old .... Obama sends his surrogates out to do his dirty work and then very eloquently says "who me?" He never takes any responsibility or accountability. If I ever saw "more politics as usual" it would be Barrack Obama, only this time at an all new low. He is a rat.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Jill from Florida — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 20:53:48 GMT

Isabella38,

And you know this because the military let you in during the Vietnam War? From your comments it sounds like you are describing yourself as one who is inept. Guess that makes YOU qualified to be President now.

The qualifications for becoming POTUS was lowered for Bush. And, now it has definitely been dropped further for both candidates.

The only question is which one will do least damage to our country while the voters work to "fire" all neo-cons and neo-libs WHO are the ones destroying our country. If the neo-libs are in control of both Houses, I prefer having McCain - the neo-libs goal is GLOBALIZATION. Not SOVEREIGNTY.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

themellems — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 21:04:03 GMT

I am a Vietnam Vet and I am soooo tired of hearing that John McCain is a former POW from the Vietnam War. He wasn't the only aircrew member shot down and captured and then finally released, but it seems like he is the only one who continually brings the subject up. When James Stockdale ran for Vice President, he didn't bring up the fact that he was also a POW in Vietnam.

So I guess that means that any aircrew member who was shot down and captured in Vietnam and then released is qualified to be the President of the United States. Just because he was a naval aviator doesn't make him a military leader. Was he a squadron commander? Was he an air group commander? He was just another pilot flying for the USA who happend to be shot down.

Give it a rest. Gen Clark is entitled to his opinions and we whould honor them, and remember in our country you can express your opinions and views without being tortured or killed!!!!

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Isabella38 — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 21:14:03 GMT

No Jill, they didn't exactly let women fight in Vietnam, not to mention I was a tad too young. I lost a grandfather during WWII, and a father in Vietnam. Neither were drafted, they joined. My brother came back less one leg from Iraq. Again, he joined because he loved this country and believed the lies of the Bush White House. I never felt the desire to join, I felt my family gave enough for this country. My mother didn't need to suffer another loss. Go ahead, vote for McCain, but don't complain when he attacks Iran, then has to reinstate the draft. I have a son who is now old enough to be drafted. I will leave this country before I let him die over a lie by the current White House.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

starfire8181 — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 21:17:10 GMT

This is for th eperson who said that you only stay in on your merits, thats not 100% accurate, my friends husband is in the navy and works on the fighter planes before they take off, and he and others all comment on how you know how smart someone is by the shift that they get, the military accepts people that they shouldn't and then gives them the easy jobs or the jobs where its not a big deal if they screw up.

And just beacuse someone serves in the military it does not mean that you can not question their record, it also does not mean that they can lead a nation. And if he is so proud of his record he should be opens to questions because he has nothing to hide.

And for the record my grandfather served in the army and the navy during WWII, my dad was in the navy during vietnam and my brother is currently in the army in Baghdad, Sadr city to exact. And I want someone who believes in bringing him home. I was done considering McCain after he said that the exact day the troops come home doesn't matter, because it does.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

onepoker — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 21:17:28 GMT

Politics 101- Get out bad damaging information on your opponent and then rush to his rescue so the news is first what a jerk your opponent is and then what a nice guy you are for defending him. it is a win win situation for Obama. If anyone didn't think Obama was a classic polititcian before this should cement it.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

sharenews — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 21:43:11 GMT

Politico

Who is smearing whom?

By JAMES KIRCHICK

7/1/08 12:33 PM EST

EXCERPT:

Writers Evan Thomas and Richard Wolfe concluded that the 2008 presidential election will be no different. It is a sure bet that the GOP will try to paint Obama as The Other — as a haughty black intellectual who has Muslim roots (Obama is a Christian) and hangs around with America-haters.

But has it been a SURE BET????

Not really. Thus far, no one with any serious affiliation to John McCain's campaign has resorted to the alleged SCARE tactics in which Republicans — and, apparently, only Republicans — have been perfecting since Richard Nixon was first elected. On the contrary, if the past few months have showed us anything, it is that the OBAMA Campaign is the one dealing in CRUDE SMEARS.

Full article: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0708/11463.html

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Jose52 — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 21:57:59 GMT

Wgoin, Now you're getting nasty! I have to work and could not stay blogging like your bambi clones. How many sites do you bounce thru? Two or three. Now, the facts are.. that a liberal rag and Romy's article hit the Clinton's GEN ass..ertion right between the buttocks. The Gen comments focuses on Hussien's total lack of preparation and experience compared to McCain. Oh. I forgot Bambi's poor judgment and that he can read a telepromter. Everything else, is your liberal bias and emotional hate. The Dems chose the wrong candidate and now feel they must defend their weak, weak sister. However, I served as an Airborne Ranger and will defend your illogical choices and weak pathetic free speech to make a fool of yourself. Hoorrah!!!! Go save babies or whales, but please keep your opinions to yourself. May God bless you.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

cbretana — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 22:11:48 GMT

Isabella,

in 1971, I was fortunate enough to make it through flight school, near the end of the Viet Nam conflict. My class started with 75 students, not a one of which could be described as you so ignorantly characterize them.. About a year later 44 of us finally graduated. Not an idiot among them, either when we started or when we graduated.

So, please yourself, but on this particular topic, at least, never think anyone with a clue about it hears anything you say with other than contempt for your complete lack of any knowledge whatsoever about it

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

randyn312 — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 22:16:54 GMT

The point, as others have made many times, is that this is a fair issue because McCain's campaign has equated his military service and POW experience with national security expertise and readiness for presidential leadership. They are not the same thing, at all. McCain's thinking is tactical; the President needs to be strategic.

I will probably get flamed for saying this, but it is unfortunate (for our politics) that military service has achieved such a cult-like, totemic status, along the lines of "think of the children," that it seemingly cannot be discussed rationally and critically.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Jill from Florida — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 22:18:39 GMT

Who ever said that McCain stated his military experience was his ONLY qualification for POTUS? Nor is lack of military experience a qualification. While the past two Presidents didn't have qualification (hiding out in the National Guard doesn't count), both those Presidents didn't have an inkling of what a service person was going through.

The All-Volunteer military is being drained, and under GW most of the war money went to Blackwater, Halliburton and other CFR companies. If this country is to remain a sovereign nation, we need a strong government military. We have a strong private military and a weaken government military. If we continue on the path set by the CFR Neo-liberals and Neo-Conservatives over the past 35 years, our country will continue its decline.

The sub-groups within the Democrats and Republicans (neo-libs and neo-cons), do not have our sovereign nation's best interests in mind. The two have been all but eliminated manufacturing starting with the end of Investment Tax Credit (Windfall Profits Tax of 1981) Carter/Reagan & neo-libs), Free Trade Agreements with China under Nixon & the neo-libs; NAFTA (HR 3450 11/22/1993) under Clinton & neo-libs and neo-cons and current free trade under GW and Pelosi & Reid & other neo-libs.

While the neo-libs appease us with extended unemployment benefits, they continue to approve more H-1 visas (UNSKILLED WORKERS). While we are choosing between gas & food, the neo-libs introduce a bill that would help close the Enron Loophole (S 3044 Consumers First Energy Act of 2008), but add the killer - Sec 7 Oil Producing Cartels - making OPEC and its members (including sovereign nations) subject to US law. It also has a windfall profits tax and allows for a Presidential Declaration of Energy Emergency (Title II Sec 204).

If the liberal Democrats really wanted to give us immediate relief on gas prices, the only issue would have been closing the Enron Loophole. And, it gives them the opportunity to blame the Republicans for stopping it. The neo-liberals are blocking any relief by continuing their inactivity of important issues FOR the US CITIZENS.

Unless we stop the neo-liberals and neo-conservatives in office, our country will be doomed. With McCain at the helm, the party line bickering will continue and we will have a few more years.

With the neo-liberals running both Houses and Obama at the helm, (90% of his Washington/New York insider backers are members of CFR and lobbyists for GLOBALIZATION.), they will succeed in the Globalization and the end of our SOVEREIGNTY,

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

fantasmic7 — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 22:27:44 GMT

I think there is one very legitimate issue regarding McCain's service record and his qualifications to be president. And that is actually his time as a POW. People here and elsewhere have described the horror of being in the Hanoi Hilton and he was there for 5+ years. It would seem there is no way that a person could be subjected to that and not come out a changed man. But yet, his thousands of pages of medical records were only viewable by a handful of reporters in a locked room with no cameras and for a limited amount of time. If you want me to believe that he is not suffering form PTSD or some mental trauma from the experience, then you need to open up every single page of medical records and every single page of military records. I am sorry if it is embarrassing, but when you are running for the highest office in the land, the employer (that is us by the way) gets to know everything. But instead, McCain makes me feel like he is hiding something, and that in no way instill confidence in the man.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

ik.nha.tun@gmail.com — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 22:34:09 GMT

What is with these pro McCain articles? Why is it that the media DRUNKARDS defend McCain at the drop of a hat? If McCain, 'the fictional character' the media has created, actually existed, I'm sure his so-called, 'august reputation' could stand up to scrutiny...Especially the scrutiny of a decorated General like General Wesley Clarke. Personally, I know you press-corp are determined to give Bush McSame aka John McCain the, unequivical 'FREE-RIDE'. Your version of McCain doesn't exist. If he did, you wouldn't need to defend him so. 'THE TRUTH NEEDS NO DEFENSE'. It can stand up on it's own.

Personally, I don't believe the medias 'covered' and 'protected' McCain exist. I do however, LOVE and LAUD the fact that he is not able to hide everything about himself, through the biased screenig of the DRUNKEN media. It seem's the medias 'all reaching McCain shield', isn't so all reaching. He can't hide the fact that he is totally on-board with the Rebushagain Parties desire to undo the American middle Class, to outsource American jobs ie the LIE 'new Global Economy', and to attack, so-called 'ROGUE' nations (actually oil rich nations), under the premise of "...capability to create WMD's.." That great Rebushagain Parties LIE. Attack Oil Rich Nations for what???? Hmmmmm, could it really be to replenish America's nearly exhausted treasury.?

We're in debt...China all but owns us. Just the small leaks of REAL news out of Iraq about Bush rewarding oil contracts to his 'big oil' cronies, teaches us that this, the strong-arming or Iraq w/ Military Might, was basically America attacking, in the position we now hold as , a 'ROGUE' nation.

McCain is totally on-board with this....He's voted w/Bush 95% of the time just in the last 6 months..Oh, and let's not forget his PTSD influenced infamous singing of, 'bombbombbomb, bombbomb Iran' WOW, isn't that funny???

Oh yeah, for all concerned about this bill that Bush signed into law yesterday...You know, the one that totally aids our loyal military and their families, with this new G.I. Bill. McCain's trying to take credit, even though he voted against it, because it was 'PORK LADEN', in as far as it gave this far-reaching coverage to our beloved veteran's. The 'war-hero' hates veteran's. He didn't want to give them anything.

There's also other unmentionable pro- republican win's in this bill. I wonder if the media will use these pro-republican wins as a sort of 'canvas' to paint McCain as the other LIE. You know, 'The Maverick', standing alone and breaking with his party??? LOL, LOL, LOL...That is funny.

You won't find the media 'DRUNKARDS' really allowing too much of this out in the publics site too long. Nope, they'll sweep it under the rug and instead, LAUD McCain's So-called impecable HERO status. I've got a question. Does anyone remember McCain's statement at a recent town-hall mtg? He was comparing his stance on Iraq to Senator Obama's. You remember, he said something like this, "...I will never accept defeat....", Hmmmm....yet, when the Rebushagain Party was found to 'NOT' be on-board with his 'Co-authored' immigration reform bill, he backed down and literally, stabbed Senator Kennedy (the bill's co-author), and the Hispanic votting constituency, in the back....He bowed out like the TRUE coward he is....Anything for political expediency.... Is that the 'crossing of the ailse' we need?

I love it. To get a REAL view of the 'THE REAL MCCAIN2' go to www.bravenewfilms.org. Oh yes, then we'll really see the 'DOUBLE-TALK' express.

One more thing....As to Senator Obama now being dubbed by the Rebushagains as a 'flip-flopper'...??? That's all too soon too call, don't you think? I mean McCain has a STALWART reputation of 25 years of flipp-flopping....McCain could be called a 'fli-flop (sadak) or a flip-flop (as a fish does when it is taken out of water) with, the WINCING HUMILIATION, of the person who is calling him this. You'd be on the right page. 'Journalistic Integrity' IN EFFECT.

When the Rebushagains quickly judge Senator Obama as a 'flip-flop', with the ilk of John (made-up by the press) McCain as you Trump card, doesn't it hurt? I mean aren't you guys in pain at heart? You know it's a lie. Are you so cold? You Rebushagains, after-all are the more so-called, 'patriotic', and Righteous'. Doesn't it hurt, tha you have to lay down your integrity to defend McSame? I mean you guys are defending a LIAR who, the most loyalist of your constituency can't get on-board with. You know, the Religious Conservative Right. They Can't back or support him because they know his 'august reputation' is a MEDIA creation. He is a LIE.

His real reputation is hidden under the falsehoods and protections, of the DRUNKEN media who is giving their 'fictional' creation 'THE FREE RIDE'. They fail to do their CIVIC DUTY of calling his character and reputation into question. They get an 'F' on this. They don't fail to do it with Senator Obama. They actually get on-board with out-right LIES, when it comes to him. Yet, they constantly, defend this FABRICATED media lie about who Bush McSame aka John McCain, really is.

Why? McCain has cultivated this 'LOVE-RELATIONSHIP' with media which has in turn, STUPEFIED them into reinventing McCain into some LEGENDARY white hat wearing figure who he is not. Why else would these DRUNKARDS come to his defense and not do their CIVIC DUTY and RIGHTLY call his character and reputation into question like everyone else.?

As Peter Gabrial sang in the hit 'In Your Eyes', "....and the GRAND FACADE so soon will burn...."

Olufemi Vim...

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

ik.nha.tun@gmail.com — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 22:36:44 GMT

I love it. To get a REAL view of the 'THE REAL MCCAIN2' go to www.bravenewfilms.org. Oh yes, then we'll really see the 'DOUBLE-TALK' express.

As Peter Gabrial sang in the hit 'In Your Eyes', "....and the GRAND FACADE so soon will burn...."

Olufemi Vim...

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

phpeters87 — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 22:40:41 GMT

After reading the distasteful comments made by Obama's minions, I've decided to vote for McCain, who was willing to lay his life down for America, instead of attending a church where the Pastor proclaimed "God D a m n America!"

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

josemarti — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 22:41:23 GMT

Dear fantasmic7. We will know soon enough whether Senator McCain suffers from PTSD. He will receive over the next four months such a sustained and vicious assault from Obama's surrogates that if he does not develop flashbacks we will be able to say with confidence that he does not have PTSD. Everyone seems to be underestimating Obama's viciousness and aggressiveness. A brief glimpse at how he won previous contests will provide ample evidence.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

josemarti — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 22:41:23 GMT

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

ik.nha.tun@gmail.com — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 22:44:57 GMT

I love it. To get a REAL view of the 'THE REAL MCCAIN2' go to www.bravenewfilms.org. Oh yes, then we'll really see the 'DOUBLE-TALK' express.

One more thing....As to Senator Obama now being dubbed by the Rebushagains as a 'flip-flopper'...??? That's all too soon too call, don't you think? I mean McCain has a STALWART reputation of 25 years of flipp-flopping....McCain could be called a 'fli-flop (sandal) or a flip-flop (as a fish does when it is taken out of water) WITHOUT, the WINCING HUMILIATION, of the person who is calling him this. You'd be on the right page. 'Journalistic Integrity' IN EFFECT.

As Peter Gabrial sang in the hit 'In Your Eyes', "....and the GRAND FACADE so soon will burn...."

Olufemi Vim...

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

ik.nha.tun@gmail.com — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 22:46:20 GMT

I love it. To get a REAL view of the 'THE REAL MCCAIN2' go to www.bravenewfilms.org. Oh yes, then we'll really see the 'DOUBLE-TALK' express.

One more thing....As to Senator Obama now being dubbed by the Rebushagains as a 'flip-flopper'...??? That's all too soon too call, don't you think? I mean McCain has a STALWART reputation of 25 years of flipp-flopping....McCain could be called a 'fli-flop (SANDAL) or a flip-flop (as a fish does when it is taken out of water) WITHOUT, the WINCING HUMILIATION, of the person who is calling him this. You'd be on the right page. 'Journalistic Integrity' IN EFFECT.

As Peter Gabrial sang in the hit 'In Your Eyes', "....and the GRAND FACADE so soon will burn...."

Olufemi Vim...

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

josemarti — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 22:51:12 GMT

dear phpeters87. I agree. What has he done for this country? I cannot even name one thing he has done for the state of Illinois.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

phpeters87 — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 22:55:14 GMT

If Obama is elected, we will need to reinstate the draft because no one will want to join the military voluntarily with Obama as CIC

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

sharenews — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 22:56:25 GMT

STUMPER

Posted Monday, June 16, 2008 6:40 PM

Why McCain Wouldn't Be Bush III (Sorry, Barack)

Andrew Romano

EXCERPT:

Yes, McCain is a Republican. Yes, he--like Bush--has Republican positions. And yes, you should vote against him if you disagree with the Republican Party on the issues. My only point here is that McCain, based on his bipartisan past, is probably one of the Republicans least likely to govern like Bush--and thus least deserving of the inevitable "Bush III" label. None of this is to say that McCain would be a perfect president, or even a good one. I'll let the voters decide that. Maybe you think he's too old. Maybe you think he's too conservative. Maybe you think he's squandered his honor for political gain. Maybe you just like Obama better. Any reason is fine, as long, that is, as the crucial comparison is between Obama and McCain--their policies, their personalities and the problems they'll face as president--and not between Obama and Bush. Because even though 43 has done some preposterous things during his time in the White House, he's not defying the Twenty-Second Amendment to run for a third term--despite what Obama says.

Here is the full story: http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/stumper/archive/2008/06/16/sorry-barack-mccain-won-t-deliver-a-third-bush-term.aspx

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

phpeters87 — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 22:57:54 GMT

McCain served his country in the Navy for 20 years, and as a US Senator for 20 years.

Obama has been a Senator for 143 days total, and has accumulated a cast of shady characters as friends and business associates.

Rezko, Ayers, Wright, Pleger and others.

The fact that this is even open for debate frightens me and makes me concerned for the future of this country.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Driver of wagons — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 23:12:15 GMT

ROVEBOTS There everywhere there ROVEBOTS There everywhere there ROVEBOTS There everywhere there ROVEBOTS There everywhere there ROVEBOTS There everywhere there ROVEBOTS There everywhere there ROVEBOTS There everywhere there ROVEBOTS There everywhere there ROVEBOTS There everywhere there everywhere

Have you all received the Arm bands yet I hear they are a vivid color of Fascist Black this GE.

You all must make your Hero Rove (Teenie Weenie) proud I know this reporter has.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

pat52007 — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 23:27:40 GMT

It's all well and good that John McCain served his country honorably and courageously. However, I agree with General Clark's comments. He has a right to say what he did and I think that General Clark would make a fine Vice-President, or President for that matter. Besides, what's the big deal with a little inter-service rivalry?? After all he was Valedictorian at West Point and NATO commander. John McCain was basically just another squadron commander...a far cry from being

a NATO commander. General Wesley Clark is highly qualified to be Commander in Chief, whereas John McCain is minimally qualified. I would rather see a former NATO commander run this country rather than a paper-pushing senator!! So to all you polically correct "whiners"...would you like a little "cheese" with that whine??

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

phpeters87 — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 23:36:06 GMT

Didn't Clark get fired by Clinton as NATO Commander?

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Isabella38 — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 23:36:47 GMT

Cbretana, when I read your post, I took your line about military flight school, Navy and USAF wrong. I was referring to the combat troops during the draft, as I thought that's what you meant by that statement. Schlang pointed out that you meant pilots, so my aplogies for the misunderstanding. I thought you were referring to the entire Navy and Air Force, not the pilots in the flight schools of those branches of the military.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Jill from Florida — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 23:39:50 GMT

There always has to be someone like Driverofwagons to bring up race. They just cannot understand how someone would NOT want Obama as POTUS, therefore, they bring up race.

Sorry, sweetheart, the race card doesn't work anymore. Obama has already broken the barrier. NOW WE LOOK AT SUBSTANCE. And, Obama clearly loses in that department.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

pat52007 — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 23:40:37 GMT

Who cares if Clark was fired by "Slick Willie"...Clinton was the one who years ago said "I loath

the military"...

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Driver of wagons — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 23:42:27 GMT

One of the reasons why McCain surely does not have the unique qualities to be Commander in Chief

On March 26, McCain gave a speech on foreign policy in Los Angeles that was billed as his most comprehensive statement on the subject. It contained within it the most radical idea put forward by a major candidate for the presidency in 25 years. Yet almost no one noticed.

In his speech McCain proposed that the United States expel Russia from the G8, the group of advanced industrial countries. Moscow was included in this body in the 1990s to recognize and reward it for peacefully ending the cold war on Western terms, dismantling the Soviet empire and withdrawing from large chunks of the old Russian Empire as well. McCain also proposed that the United States should expand the G8 by taking in India and Brazil-but pointedly excluded China from the councils of power.

We have spent months debating Barack Obama's suggestion that he might, under some circumstances, meet with Iranians and Venezuelans. It is a sign of what is wrong with the foreign-policy debate that this idea is treated as a revolution in U.S. policy while McCain's proposal has barely registered. What McCain has announced is momentous-that the United States should adopt a policy of active exclusion and hostility toward two major global powers. It would reverse a decades-old bipartisan American policy of integrating these two countries into the global order, a policy that began under with Beijing and continued with Moscow. It is a policy that would alienate many countries in Europe and Asia who would see it as an attempt by Washington to begin a new cold war.

McCain is a mere mirage of himself

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Vinny295 — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 23:44:59 GMT

Maybe Clark was right about McCain not being qualified to his standards....but out of the two that ARE running for president McCain or Obama, who has the better military experience? Who has more political experience? Even if he is only a "pencil pushing senator" he still is the MUCH more qualified and experience canidate! McCain's getting shot down doesn't make him a hero. Being man enough to serve this country wearing a military uniform made him the hero. He just happened to have been shot down.

Clark is a very experienced soldier but to comment on how McCain isnt' the better person for the job is quite amazing to me. Why would he want someone with no military experience at all, NONE whatsoever, lead our country over someone who was only a "peacetime squadron commander?"

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Vinny295 — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 23:44:59 GMT

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Driver of wagons — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 23:45:24 GMT

Ill from Florida I never ever have brought up race in any of my post. But I can see where someone like you could think that.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Jill from Florida — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 23:46:57 GMT

The Democrats didn't think General Wesley Clark was qualified enough to be POTUS in 2004. Does his experience in CFR count that much that he would be a GREAT POTUS now?

Why are the neo-liberals looking for a military VP anyway? Are they afraid the people will revolt when the kool-aid wears off and we see that they sold our country out? The only exports we have are our food and our jobs. And the neo-liberals are increasing the amount of H-1 Visa (unskilled workers) while unemployment is high.

WAKE UP PEOPLE. FIRE THE NEO-LIBERALS and THE NEO-CONSERVATIVES. Both are selling us out.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

pat52007 — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 23:48:46 GMT

Clinton was an elitist; a good manager of the economy, but still an elitist along with Hillary. Don't get me wrong, I don't necessarily support this Democratic nominee(Obama) or McCain for that matter. The only candidate that came close for me was Ron Paul. And of course we all know the economic and foreign policy disasters created by the current administration!! This country is in desparate need of strong leadership but it ain't gonna get this election cycle coming up.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

erikonil — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 23:56:32 GMT

phpeters87: No. No he wasn't fired. He retired. Yes there were rumors about him being let go fro political reasons, but he retired.

Jill from Florida : Tell me what policy McCain has right now that stands out better then Obama's. The only policy's I've seen off of his website and from his speeches have been haphazard and pretty much shown to have any real substance, helping corporations, cutting taxes for the rich and restricting the health rights of women.

I Think General Clark was spot on in his response. Just being a POW doesn't quality you. People seem to forget that before he said the little comment about the fighter jet, he had said that McCain was a hero. But heroics don't make a good policy maker.

If McCain wants to be president, let him get there by giving us good policy instead of crying wolf everyone pulls away the mirrors to show that he's not the maverick of media legend. Right now Obama is the only one of the two not throwing unfounded mud. He critiques, he doesn't smear.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Jill from Florida — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 00:00:37 GMT

pat52007:

The economic and foreign policy disasters started under Nixon with opening trade with China. Each administration since (under neo-liberal Congress) has added to the disaster. This did NOT start overnight, but has been an ongoing policy of the NEOS.

GLOBALIZATION is the key word. (Replaces NEW WORLD ORDER). The Neo's wanted our country to become service oriented, not manufacturing based. NAFTA was under Clinton & voted in by 41% Democrats (neo-liberals only) and 75% Republicans. The only concern that the neoliberals had was that the receiving nations had to have fair pay. Not one bit of concern for the millions of US Citizens who lost their manufacturing jobs. (Retraining for burger flipping - whoop-de-do)

Every POTUS since Nixon and the Neo's are totally to blame. We WILL NEVER be a strong nation without manufacturing. And we will never have manufacturing IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA with the neo-liberals and neo-conservatives in office.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Chicago Todd — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 00:00:38 GMT

One of the facts missing from this article is how the press has been instrumental in providing a conduit for the "outrage" of the GOP to be amplified non-stop. From the flag lapel pin to the public fund rejection, the press ignores McCain doing exactly the same thing yet gives a stage/voice to the GOP. The perils are the vacuous press -- not Clark's statement Mr. Romano.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Jill from Florida — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 00:08:50 GMT

erikonil,

I don't like either candidates. 90% of Obama's advisors are the same ones who destroyed our manufacturing base, increased the H-1 Visas, Stopped alternative energy programs in 1982 on.

We are where we are because of Obama's advisors - Daschle, Brzezinski, Hart, Dodd, Durbin, Mitchell, Leahy, Biden, Kerry, Kennedy, Nunn, Bingaman etc. If they had never been elected into office, we would have a strong economy.

Since the neoliberals are most likely going to get their (please no) absolute majority in both houses, with Obama as POTUS, there will be NO STOPPING GLOBALIZATION. With McCain at the helm, maybe the destruction of the USA can be slowed down enough to get the neo's out.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

pat52007 — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 00:13:08 GMT

Well said Jill; As I said I was leaning toward Ron Paul...He basically spelled out everything you have just said. Maybe now that he is out of the race we should consider Ralph Nader; at least he understands the greed of the "Corporate Machine" and the military industrial complex. I am open to suggestions. I don't think Obama or McCain will bring anything new and I am resigned to this.

It's amazing how really dumbed-down Americans are when it comes to being hood-winked by this two-party system(Democrats and Republicans). If we don't get real leadership soon I am afraid that this country is in "Real Trouble"!! But unless America wakes up and smells the coffee soon, I see little hope!!

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

gunlingbluecollarman — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 00:27:55 GMT

If all you Obama supporters out there are the enlightened progressives you claim to be then start acting like it. If you want to criticize McCain for being a flipflopper or a warmonger go ahead. But don't indulge in cheap shots about him being in inept pilot because he was shot down (bombing runs are dangerous because you have to line up over the target, not zig zag around missles) or calling him a coward because he "allowed" himself to be taken alive instead of flying his burning jet into Ho Chi Min's bedroom. If Mr. Death Before Dishonor here, recalls a time when American soldiers would not allow themselves to be captured, just when the hell was that !? The survivors of Bataan and Corregidor will appreciate your armchair opinion of them.

My favorite comment here is from the guy who says you don't hear Sen. Kerry always touting his war record. Well if you didn't hear him, it's becuse you had your fingers in your ears through all of 2004. Name one other personal quality Kerry told us qualified him to be president.

You don't have to defend General Clarke in order to defend your messiah Senator Obama. I agree the McCain campaign was too quick to hold Obama responsible for Clarke's "bluntness", but this doesn't mean Clarke's comments are not a liability to Obama. Clarke may relish his no-nonsense, tell it like it is style of campaigning, but it doesn't work when you're campaigning for someone else. Like it or not tact is important in a political campaign. You don't win undecided voters by preaching to the converted. I don't recall this much praise for Hillary's "bluntness" when she pointed out Obama's lack of support among the white working class, or when she reminded us that "Bobby Kennedy wasn't assasinated until June."

Clarke's comments were techinically correct, but crudely stated. Obama does not need help of this kind. He is better off without him. It sounded like Clarke forgot he was campaigning for Obama and not for himself. His statements that McCain's experience as a junior officer is not good enough to be president because you have to have the high level executive experience of a general does no good to Obama whose only executive experience is as a comunity organizer. If Clarke is going to dismiss McCain's 26 years in the Senate as irrelevant, what does that say about Obama's 3 years ?

I understand you rabid Obama supporters don't see anything wrong with this picture, but it will take more votes than yours for him to get elected.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Driver of wagons — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 00:33:01 GMT

One of the reasons why McCain surely does not have the unique qualities it takes to be Commander in Chief

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Driver of wagons — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 00:36:01 GMT

Another reason why McCain does not have the unique qualities it takes to be Commander in Chief

TIM RUSSERT: So we could have two wars at once?

SEN. McCAIN: I think we could have Armageddon.

- John McCain, on the Iran crisis. April 2nd 2006, on

Meet The Press.

I think the man suffers from the early stages of Alzheimers or he is just a plain loon

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Driver of wagons — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 00:49:58 GMT

Another reason why McCain does not have the unique qualities to be Commander in Chief

Many Vietnam veterans and former POWs have fumed at

McCain for keeping these and other wartime files

sealed up. His explanation, offered freely in Senate

hearings and floor speeches, is that no one has been

proven still alive and that releasing the files would

revive painful memories and cause needless emotional

stress to former prisoners, their families and the

families of MIAs still unaccounted for. But what if

some of these returned prisoners, as has always been

the case at the conclusion of wars, reveal information

to their debriefing officers about other prisoners

believed still held in captivity? What justification

is there for filtering such information through the

Pentagon rather than allowing access to source

materials? For instance, debriefings from returning

Korean war POWs, available in full to the American

public, have provided both citizens and government

investigators with important information about other

Americans who went missing in that conflict.

You have closure John (or do you) don't you think it would be presidential to give closure to your brothers in arms and their families?

Oh thats right you are not presidential thats why you can't do it.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

misterharban — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 00:52:12 GMT

General Coark: You just can't fix stupid. Go back to killing civilians in Kosovo.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Driver of wagons — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 01:14:46 GMT

Another reason why McCain does not have the unique qualities to be Commander in Chief

"passportgate"

Two issues need to be looked into. Why was this buried

until after the contract with Stanley was awarded and

who held up the release of this information. And

second, whether in fact McCain was in fact breached at

all. Many (except the media) are saying that McCain

was not breached.

My review of the Board and Managers of Stanley

revealed that many, if not most, were former Navy

officers and/or Annapolis graduates. When I tracked

the option transaction of the senior officials I found

the dates paralleled the incursions into private

files. The story was buried until after the

announcement of the one-half-billion-dollar contract

with State on 17 March. McCain certainly must know

these people.

Neck deep in the swill of lobbyist

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

vakosh — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 01:22:25 GMT

DEMOCRATS FOR MCCAIN

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

vakosh — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 01:22:55 GMT

DEMOCRATS FOR MCCAIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

vakosh — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 01:23:25 GMT

DEMOCRATS FOR MCCAIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

er123 — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 01:41:21 GMT

Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lays down his life for his friends.

Who is that man? Obama or McCain?

Voters and the media rejected Gore and Kerry (both risked their lives in Vietnam) and chose Bush, who was praised by the media as 'charming.'

History repeats itself. The media is praising Obama to high heaven and ignoring McCain, a war hero. Only this time, the party is reversed.

Think again, but voters do not learn lesson from the past. They forget easily. Loyalty should be to the country and not to the party.

We deserve the kind of government we have because we put Bush in the White House. Learning not a lesson, we reelected him. The country is on the edge. There is no room for error. One more mistake, it could be the fall of our beloved America.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

wnzin — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 01:50:36 GMT

erikonil: The Nation had and article in 2003 on Wesley Clark's 'High Noon' Moment. It did not sound like politics to me. The Guardian also had several articles on th e incident that led to his early "retirement" in 1999.

Wes Clark's effort to trivialize the service another ex-military member gave to this country in a time of war is astounding. Clark mentioned in the interview that good judgement and the ability to communicate and the power to persaude. All of which are attributes McCain has shown in his service to this country in both the military and politics.

Senator McCain pushed for torture to stop and worked to pass what became the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005. He worked to pass the McCain-Feingold bill on campaign finance reform. McCain has worked for many other bills that benefit our country. The thing that impresses me most about Mccain as a politician does what he thinks is right for America even when he is aware that his position will be misstated and used against used against him politically.

Senator McCain is also on the Senate committee on Armed Services (Ranking Member), Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation and the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs. He served in Congress before the winning his Senate position. All of which is further evidence of his skills and leadership abilities.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Jill from Florida — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 01:53:29 GMT

Posted By: Driver of wagons (July 1, 2008 at 9:14 PM)

Another reason why McCain does not have the unique qualities to be Commander in Chief

"passportgate"

Two issues need to be looked into. Why was this buried

until after the contract with Stanley was awarded and

who held up the release of this information. And

second, whether in fact McCain was in fact breached at

all. Many (except the media) are saying that McCain

was not breached.

*******

You must be one of Obama's paid Rumor Mongers.

You completely forgot to discuss the second contracted company involved in PASSPORTGATE.

THE ANALYSIS CORPORATION had one employee who breeched McCain's and Obama's passports. The employee was "disciplined" and remained on the job. John Brennan, TAC president, is a consultant for Obama on National Security. Both Brennan and TAC CEO Philip Nolan donated money to the Obama campaign prior to any breeches.

The two Stanley Company employees who breeched the passports were fired.

So, the guy who's company was doing the breeching is an Obama consultant. No wonder why nothing ever happened to the companies involved, as both are still under contract.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

wnzin — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 02:07:24 GMT

Driver of wagons: The law which prohibits releasing the POW debriefing documents allows a returned prisoner of war to view his own file or to designate another person to view it. It seems that some view that all should be opened in the hopes of their getting McCain's debriefing report and most likely using it to attack him politically. A rather despicable hope in my view, which leads me to support his view that they should be kept private. The man was tortured a POW and has a right to privacy on the debriefing of his time as POW.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

gunlingbluecollarman — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 02:18:54 GMT

"Right now Obama is the only one of the two not throwing unfounded mud. He critiques, he doesn't smear."

Give us a break erikonil. Obama's the one who accused the McCain campaign BEFORE THE FACT of planning to try to frighten voters by pointing out that Obama is black. He didn't say Republicans or McCain supporters would do this, he said the "campaign" would. Since it's McCain's campaign, he was making a none to subtle implication that this would be McCain's doing. This from Mr. Unity who admonishes his opponents for not sticking to the issues and for being "divisive" and creating "distractions."

The total silence from the mainstream media on Obama's accusation throws a pail of water on the assertion in a lot of these posts that the media is giving McCain a free pass while excoriating Obama.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

sharenews — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 02:54:12 GMT

Politico

Who is smearing whom?

By JAMES KIRCHICK

7/1/08 12:33 PM EST

EXCERPT:

But has it been a SURE BET????

Full article: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0708/11463.html

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

alshannonky — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 04:13:59 GMT

I believe as I think many Americans do, that just because one fights in war doesn't make them qualified for anything more that what they were, a soldier. I think the greatest sin of John McCain is not that he fought in an unpopular Vietnam war, or that he was shot down by an inferior enemy, or even that he spent 5 years in a prisoner of war camp, and wasn't able or even tried to escape. His greatest sin is that he is bragging about it, and has made it into a career as a politician. He now demands Americans elect him president based on such wasted service, as was the Vietnam war.

Our two last presidents never spent one day of military service, yet both of them ran against so called war heroes, (Robert Dole and John Kerry). It is not that America doesn't care about military service, I think most do, but it should be America's idea to reward such services and not the politician. I think every time McCain stumbles or slurs his words or says something completely stupid or even loses is explosive temper, Americans are reminded of two things: One is that McCain will be 72 in August (about the same age Ronald Reagan began suffering with senility), and secondly, that McCain was tortured for 5 years and must be suffering from its effects. Think about that the next time America needs a stable mind and stable judgement at 3 am in the morning.

YES, Democrats should never stop reminding the public of McCain's service. It is a war that loses McCain votes every time he brags so proudly about it. After all, he didn't win the Vietnam war, but he was a poster child for one of the most unpopular wars in the past century. He didn't win a bombing mission and come back as a hero, but was a victim of America's inferior enemy. Such a reminder of shame isn't something a smart person brags about, but I am in total favor of every republican who thinks otherwise.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Otto-the-wise — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 04:35:52 GMT

Everything is fair game and McCain has no right to claim freedom from investigation or full considerations, in-depth.

He has not published his military record in its entirety. He has not submitted to testing for 'incipient Alzheimer's." He is withholding evidence and we must presume he is guilty on all counts unless he comes clean. Think of him as having Incipient Alzheimer's; he is the worst of Reagan II and Nancy all in denial for years.

The bottom line on the Clark comment is that being a pilot is not a test of command.

What tests there were appear to have been too great for McCain. Crashes, being shot down, and even personal failures galore, confessed in his biography. Why suppose he is more than a failed case, too old to govern long enough to serve a full term. What positives there were about him have vanished in his morphed new alliance with the right. All his prior positions have changed, almost over night. The rebel has become the pet of the dark forces. Nothing to see here folks. He is washed up, a never was, who never could be, too old, too late.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

tombizodwa — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 04:42:31 GMT

WESLEY CLARK you are the man! I salute you for saying ""

We love our men and women in uniform, but for McCain that is not the pathway to the Whitehouse. Watching the video, I observed how rapidly McCain's eye blinked on responding to the attack.

I am interested in McCain telling me how his military credentials would be used to scare the Saudis in giving us cheaper gas! I am interested in McCain telling me how his military service would scare Venezuala to produce more oil..... Tell them Wesley Clark. I used to take Clark for granted until now.

Democrats should stop bringing McCain's military service in the ring. McCain should stop bragging about his military credential, we have over $500 billion dollars wasted in Iraq, soldier-deaths almost surpassing the deaths at the World Trade Center. These men and women in uniform are struggling day-in-and-day out, while some of us enjoy sitting in our couches changing channel to channel listening to what McCain has to say about his military resume some 3 decades ago. McCain should speak our language, and address our fears and needs.

As for Obama, I am disappointed in your rush to distance yourself from Wesley Clark: what type of President is gonna be pushed around by political correctness.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

sharenews — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 04:45:21 GMT

alshannonky, you more than once state that McCain brags about his military career? He is far from bragger, but it has come up during his political career; just has it did when Gen. Wesley Clark ran for President back in 2004.

McCain Launches 1st General Election Ad; Cites Military Service

by Associated Press

Wednesday, June 11, 2008

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/06/11/mccain-launches-1st-general-election-ad-cites-military-service/

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

sharenews — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 04:57:29 GMT

tombizodwa, I agree. A salute goes out to Gen. Wesley Clark for not only making a statement to demean / minimize McCains military service, but to NOT apologize for what he said (even though Obama rejected his words) AS IT ONLY HELPS MCCAIN when Obamas camp disses him on his military career, in whatever capacity. Gen. Clark is such a hypocrite given he brought up his credentials with his military service when he was running for President back in 2004. With a supporter like Clark, Obama doesnt need enemies to taint his campaign.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

ChicoCDM — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 05:00:13 GMT

As a fellow West Pointer I am thouroughly dissapointed in Wes Clark's comments. He is a political indiot and should find another profession. HE REALLY DOES NOT GET IT!! Of all people you'd think he would. For the first time in my life I will say GO NAVY in honor of John McCain.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Jill from Florida — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 05:02:01 GMT

alshannonky (July 2, 2008 at 12:13 AM)

I believe as I think many Americans do, that just because one fights in war doesn't make them qualified for anything more that what they were, a soldier.

********

I can guarantee that you have never seen any action in the military outside of movies. For you to assume that all service men and women are soldiers is really quite ignorant.

John Kerry's experience in the military was more than GW's, but not by much. The Vietnam War was unpopular, but it is more despicable for you to downgrade those who did serve.

Exactly what is Obama's excuse for his temper? After his blow up at Senator Graham on the Senate floor in June, 2007, I lost all respect for Obama. Maybe all that 20-year indoctrination he received from Rev Wright is engrained in him and he has regular relapses.

General Wesley Clark tried running as the military experienced candidate in 2004, and it got HIM nowhere (a little bitter perhaps). While military experience is not a sole reason for a POTUS qualification, the lack of ANY military experience leads to stupid blunders - like GW. Book learning is nothing compared to real life experience. Nor did his video war games help him out.

Neither of the two candidates really have what it takes to bring this country back to being a strong sovereign nation. Obama and his neo-liberals are the ones who exported most of manufacturing jobs overseas via the trade agreements. The neo-liberals stopped federal funding for alternative energy research in the early 1980's (while Canada continued with sandy oil extraction - our major import from Canada). The neo-conservatives sent our troops to Iraq twice. The neo-liberals are more interested in energy policies up to 2050 than they are to closing the Enron Loophole 5 months ago - or even before they left for recess last week.

While Kerry was the lesser of two evils, this time McCain is the lesser of the two evils. Our sovereignty is at stake with the neo-liberals in control of both Houses. Globalization will be a reality under Obama. (Then watch the draft come back to stiffle the revolting citizens.)

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

sharenews — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 06:10:52 GMT

ChicoCDM , I agree with you. when Obama said that he rejected Gen. Clark's comments, why wouldnt Gen Clark apologize ...or at least not talk about it again the next day to rub it in more without apologizing? I dont get it. Or maybe he was TOLD not to apologize by the Obama camp? I dont get it. The smart thing for a much respected General like Wesley Clark would have been to fade out of the headlines by doing a quick apology given Obama is trying to pump up peoples belief in his patriatism as it is to make up for the past e.g. lack of flag pin, no hand over heart, his church Rev Wright damning America and its government with the membership of the church dancing, laughing, clapping, in unison condoning such words as if it was nothing they have never heard before.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

walash — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 06:19:44 GMT

1. Why would a "war hero" hide his Military Records? What is he hiding? Kerry signed the Form 180 waiver and released all of his records. Old McBush refuses to do so.

2. He received numerous demerits at the US Naval Acadamy and graduated 894 out of 899. His 4 star Admiral father pulled strings to get him in.

3. Did he collaborate with the Vietnamese?

4. He killed 167 US sailors on the USS Forrestal and his 4 star Admiral father promptly

transferred him to another ship

5. He admitted to being a War Criminal on 60 Minutes, 1997, CBS News,for bombing innocent women and children

6. Why did the Vietnamese give him the codename Songbird?

7. The POW’s said that McCain made 32 propaganda videos for the communist North Vietnamese in which he denounced America for what they were doing in Vietnam.

8. Why did the Vietnamese erect a bust in his honor?

9. All Republicans in Congress voted to release government records of POW/MIA on Vietnam, only 1 person blocked it, Old McBush. Why?

10. Wouldn't the Navy wash his records? His father and grandfather were both 4 star admirals in the Navy.

11. How did he receive medals from the Navy when there were no eyewitnesses when eyewitnesses are required?

12. How did he get 28 medals in less than 20 hours of combat? Did his 4 star admiral father help him? Some grunts fighting on the ground for 7000 hours received no medals

13. Yet in McCain's own words just four days after being captured, he admits he violated the U.S.

14. Military Code of Conduct by telling his captors "O.K, I'll give you military information if you will take me to the hospital."

15. Many say he was never tortured. It is possible he crashed and was not shot down. He had crashed 4 previous planes. His injuries were mostly sustained when he ejected.

16. He also violated military uniform code of conduct having relations with subordinates, a crime.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b3VqMUiZ2-g

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vFM1xqqTX_g

http://www.usvetdsp.com/story22.htm

http://usvetdsp.com/jan08/mccain_military_record.htm

http://www.farfromglory.com/john_s_mccain.htm

http://www.picassodreams.com/picasso_dreams/2008/06/editorial-john.html

http://www.vietnamveteransagainstjohnmccain.com/cin_hacker_2.htm

Google these to learn more

McCain Songbird

McCain Adultery

McCain Lobbyists

McCain Charlie Black

McCain USS Forrestal

McCain Enron Loophole

McCain Arizona Mob

McCain Kosovo Muslims

McCain Fortune

McCain Traitor

McCain Flip Flopa

McCain Torturers' Lobby

The Mass Murderer Coward admitted to 60 Minutes, 1997 to dropping bombs on innocent Women and Children. He admitted to committing War Crimes. His Honor is committing Adultery and having multiple relations with subordinates violating Military Uniform Code of Conduct, a crime.

Honor for collaborating with the Enemy. Honor for being an idiot and killing 167 US Sailors on

the USS Forrestal. Honor for so many demerits to end up graduating 894 out of 899, Class of

1958. Perfect Character and Cowardice to belong to the Gas & Oil Party.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

alshannonky — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 07:37:45 GMT

I suppose it is ashamed that Abraham Lincoln, a republican, and one who never served in the armed forces, has his face embedded on Mt. Rushmore. If I am not mistaken, he also was a lawyer from the state of Illinois. Oh yes, and his greatest legislation was the Emancipation Proclamation. How ironic that the product of that one piece of paper has lead to one candidate (Obama) having the opportunity to be free, to vote, to be educated, to be wealthy, and yes, even be president of these United States.

One of the strangest things about the election of 2008 is not the John McCain is running for president with an unpopular war, gas prices sky rocketing, and the housing market nearly collapsing. The fact that he is nearly 72 years old, not attractive, not articulate, not energetic, and doesn't even bend over backwards to the religious right, can not escape one. However, the strangest thing is that beside all this, he has a chance of winning this election. Call that what you will, but that is amazing. Nonetheless, not even an impeccable military record could elect John McCain.

However, the most amazing part of this election year is that it had the first woman and first black candidates have a true chance of winning. America is changing, and that very quickly. Oh that Mr. Lincoln could see all this. Change doesn't come easy, but I think America is about to wake up November 5th with new leadership in the oval office_President Barack Obama and Vice President Hillary Clinton (I think he will choose her as his VP). Embed that on Mt. Rushmore, because history is in the making.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

joecommon@mailinator.com — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 10:00:28 GMT

Just think, Barack Hussain would have changed his mind and jumped at the chance to get out of turture, even if it meant leaving his mates behind. Hussain has a long history of changing his mind - guns, and gays come to mind right away. Then he keeps changing religion - muslim, christian, maybe catholic is next? Who is this guy anyway?

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

lsharfner — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 10:58:36 GMT

I am a pilot and most of the guys I work with are military pilots. None of us feel that this alone qualifies us for the office of the president, which is all Clark was saying. 2 questions I would like McCain to answer: Why won't he release his official military records to the public? How did someone who graduated at the bottom 1% of his class get a flight slot anyway?

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

bcrawf2033 — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 11:39:20 GMT

Senator Obama has applauded Senator McCain's military service and POW experience numerous times. As a fellow veteran, I too have the highest respect for the great sacrifice Senator McCain has made in the preservation of freedom in our Nation. However, I agree with General Clark on his assessment that just because you served in the military it doesn't make you qualified to be President of the United States of America. I served in combat zones but there were some soldiers who seldom saw combat or even field duty because of the nature of their job. There was a lot of favoritism, racism, and sexism that went on, especially in the late 1970's and I'm sure it exists in some sectors even now. The military trains you to follow orders, not lead. Many young commanders make horrific mistakes while they are in the learning curve and it's dangerous to be under their command. They think they know it all and don't listen to those with experience in the field. Some are cocky and headstrong. They've been watching too much TV. Former President Bill Clinton did not serve in the military but he made a good Commander-in-Chief. I think Senator Obama will do the same because he weighs the situation with balance. I'm confident that he will exhaust all avenues of diplomacy before committing our troops into harms way. We need someone with sound judgement, foreign policy advisors with integrity, and truthful intelligence. Obama 08.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

easterniron — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 11:51:34 GMT

If McCain's POW history isn't a mirror into his character or his love of country, I don't know what is. Of course, it alone does not qualify him to be president, but it certainly show an obvious contrast to the two questions people ask about OBAMA. What about Obama's character? I'm not sure divorcing himself from Rev. Wright only after he realized what a problem Wright's presence in his life was for him shows strength of character. And there are a whole host of reasons to question his true love of country. So maybe you can choose to vote for Obama based on experience, or concrete ideas on solving America's problems..don't think that would work either.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

HappyDay41 — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 12:15:15 GMT

Being in the military does not automatically qualify a person to be a President, but it is proven that people with military experience are less apt to enter into a war than civilian leadership-- because the civilians have no idea what the experience of war is like. ... however I have a couple of other problems with the obama people on this one:

First, our soldiers are promised honor and respect and are asked to sacrifice--sometimes horrific sacrifices--for this country and its people. To have a discussion that somehow minimizes or diminishes the perils, the suffering, that they go through is vulgar, in my opinion. When a soldier returns, they should have the red carpet treatment for the rest of thier lives and should want for nothing. We do not treat our military service personelle with such respect and every person who dismisses a soldier, and who didn't serve in wartime, should be hung up by their toe-nails and expelled from this country.

Second, McCain was a young man at the time of his imprisonment who could have made any of a number of choices--some of which would have made his captivity easier, or shorter, depending on if he wanted to sell out his country or service comrades. He did not. He protected his country and suffered for it-- I don't need to know much more about the man's character.

Obama has proven he will sell out his best friend if it will get him ahead. He uses people, gets what he wants, and uses them as a stepping stone to his next goal. He did so with Alice Palmer, Rev. Wright, Hillary Clinton, and the United States Senate.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

HappyDay41 — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 12:30:48 GMT

Alshannonky says:

"After all, he didn't win the Vietnam war, but he was a poster child for one of the most unpopular wars in the past century. He didn't win a bombing mission and come back as a hero, but was a victim of America's inferior enemy. Such a reminder of shame isn't something a smart person brags about, but I am in total favor of every republican who thinks otherwise."

I am appalled at your words: "the most unpopular" war (what about Iraq?)... "a victim of America's inferior enemy" (what about Iraq?)...."such a reminder of shame"....???

You are talking this way during the Iraq war, an unpopular war, where so many are returning with mangled bodies and minds, or not returning at all and their families have to justify their deaths. One woman in Calif. has lost TWO beautiful sons to this "unpopular" war...and you are going to offer a "reminder of shame" for her to wrap her memories in?

Are you sick?

Or just heartless?

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

OldGamer007 — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 12:37:38 GMT

What is this, do as I say, not as I do? Republicans didn't mind calling Iraq vets who criticized the war "liberal shills", now they are whining because a General points out the fact ones service doesn't constitute a free ride to the presidency? (Clark ran in 04, he would know)

Not sure what's more pathetic, the GOP handing out this Orwellian flavored kool-aid, or the boneheads buying it.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

4carol — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 12:47:41 GMT

Don't know how Obama has used everything as stepping stones. What do you think MCShame has done?? Talk about the horrific sacrifices of our military and their benefits when they return home; and you will have your stepping stones in MCCain...he voted AGAINST increasing the benefit package for our troops - but, he want to command them!!!???

Sounds like many of you need to do some more homework on both the candidates.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

coop29 — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 12:54:17 GMT

I worked for Wesley Clark and can honestly say he was and is the most politically motivated individual I have ever met in uniform, and a terrible example to the troops. In is the quintessential political opportunist with precious little combat experience of his own. He infuriated his fellow commanders and never made any secret about his close friendship with Bill Clinton, using it to great advantage. His conduct is reprehensible now not because he is dissing a true hero (bad enough), but because he knows better, and once again is angling for SecDef of VP or whatever.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Psi1Nupe1 — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 13:03:22 GMT

Regardless if you like the comments or not the facts are what they are. Being a POW and being shot sown does not prepare you for Commander-in-Chief. We will always honor McCain for his service but the bottom line is he is not the best candidate this time around. The Repubicans knew this during the 2000 campaign and that is why they did not pick him then. McCain would have been better than Bush however, but the GOP did not think his military service was important then even compared to Bush's national guard service. I am a 22 year plus military officer and I understand Clark's comments. It is about judgement and that may be what caused McCain to have gotten shot down in the first place. The only problem I have with McCain and his military experience and his military family is that it appears he believes that a nation at war is a natural state of existence. I am not sure he is a man of peace.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Psi1Nupe1 — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 13:09:21 GMT

Posted By: coop29 (July 2, 2008 at 8:54 AM)

Coop 29, stop lying you never work for Clark. And you say "can honestly say" PLEASE!

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

europa5 — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 13:14:08 GMT

I completely disagree. I saw Clark on Face the Nation and he was well-spoken, confident, and I loved that he had the cahunas to say anything about McCain's qualifications. He's the ONLY one who can; no one can attack his record. He is the PERFECT VP for Obama. Obama is so liberal; he needs a decorated Military man on his ticket. I wanted Hillary to win - and I'm not fond of Obama, but if Clark is on the ticket I will vote for him.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

HappyDay41 — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 13:35:37 GMT

I did some more homework as you suggest, 4carol, and here's what I found:

Not knowing which particular bill you were referencing, I looked at military and veteran votes.

Guess how your boy obama voted?

He didn't (surely you are not surprised!)

You are right, on one bill (out of about 10) McCain did vote no. But, if you read the bill and all that was included, it wasn't just military, It was loaded with earmarks which, as you know, McCain is against.

By the way, you should take your own advice and do some more homework...

McCain, in Feb. 2006, released a letter written to obama, in which he addresses the fact that obala promised to work with McCain on bipartisan legislation to reform lobbying on Capitol Hill, then backed out of his promise and took a partisan stance with the Democrats. Obala had asked that the measure get tied up in a committee.

Why didn't he want lobbying reform in 2006?

Why doesnt' he use his whole name, "Barack H. Obama, Jr." as listed in Senate records? (Or is his name "Barack Hussein Obama, II" as listed on what he claims to be his birth certificate?)

Do you know for sure who this guy is?

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

News and Notes — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 13:54:04 GMT

If you think about this objectively, you don't have to be a McCain supporter to think this entire line of discussion is perilous to Obama. This is far worse than swiftboating. There are literally dozens of statements and policy positions that McCain holds that can be used to debate what kind of president he would be. One could argue McCain would be a terrible president, but he is qualified, and his military service is one of those qualifications. McCain's military service includes 5 1/2 years in a torture chamber. Any refernce to his military service that is less than glowing only hurts Obama, since his resume is much thinner.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

cardtel — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 13:55:40 GMT

Sheifer's statement that Obama never flew a plane and crashed was "out of line". Clark had to give the answer he gave. He "told it like it is". The media pundits are too busy with poll disecting to allow their brains to appreciate the intellect of Wesley Clark.

As we said during WW II, "Blow it out your barracks bag"

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

cardtel — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 13:55:47 GMT

As we said during WW II, "Blow it out your barracks bag"

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Driver of wagons — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 13:55:58 GMT

yeah and i used to work for clark too and McCain and Dumbya and kerry and powell. what a bunch of crap. i have even been accused of working for Obama really more crap would love to work for obama but i have not got a call. and i am too radical for his good. get real people and back your candidate but don't try and impress names on the page of a blog with your bull and even if you did or do work for a politician and may have gotten fired for reasons you don't agree with don't cry on the blogs. Here is a clue, no one cares. fight for your candidate of choice that is commendable but bragging or crying on the blogs about who you may work for or have worked for is not. big fricking deal. Get over yourself!

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

staggerlee — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 13:58:21 GMT

I too share Clark's opinion. McCain has used his POW status as a crutch much too long. Since America now tortures prisoners, and McCain has quietly acquiesced since launching his candidacy his own imprisonment & torture has no significance any more.

His military career is not all that stellar. Near bottom of his class. (Didn't Custer rank at the bottom of his class also?) His ship (carrier) goes up in flames under him, and then he gets shot down & captured. With that kind of record behind him I shudder to think of him as Commander in Chief.

I'm reminded of the "Daisy ad", the little girl picking flowers and the mushroom cloud behind her. With Mad Mac's notorious temperment and his "Bomb, bomb. bomb Iran" musings, do you really want this man's hand near the button. I for one do not.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

cbretana — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 13:59:15 GMT

Isabella,

If you're still here, (I dropped off for the night) I humbly accept your response and retract my last comments about your post... You are gracious indeed to take the time to reconsider what you had initially read, and even more gracious to admit to have misunderstood my post. We all often hear what we expect, and not was was meant, when we struggle over ideas. We would all agree much more and get much more accomplished If more of us (myself included) could follow your example.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

olderwiser — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 14:08:30 GMT

Mandela became president after being in prison thirty years in South Africa. I wonder if that imprisonment made him a better leader. I wonder if ten years in the Hanoi prison would have made Mc Cain a better candidate instead of five years. I wonder if we have a lot of really good candidates in our prisons. Just the ones who are innocent, not the guilty ones. I wonder how many of our prisoners in Guantanamo will make good presidents in the Muslim countries that we are turning into Democracies because of their war imprisonment. Just what is it about prison that makes a good president? Could it be the torture? Guantanamo, then, is a terrific place to introduce democracy to the Muslim world. Good job, Bush. You really know how to spread democracy. We will miss you so much.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

olderwiser — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 14:12:35 GMT

After Mc Cain wins, Guantanamo prisoner, you can become president of Iraq. Be sure to recite Mc Cain's imprisonment and torture as one of your qualifications. Plays big with the military vote.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

olderwiser — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 14:19:21 GMT

But now, Guantanamo prisoner, you don't want to run for president of Iraq until the Iraq democracy gets outside the American fence there in Baghdad. That's the fence that keeps the whole Iraq democratic government from being blown up by suicide bombers who don't want democracy. Some day, when that shipload of flowers arrives to throw at the American Democratic Troops, you will be safe to run on your prisoner of war and torture platform for President of the Iraq Democratic Government that everybody shows that the want by throwing a shipload of flowers at the American Troops there. Be sure and mention frequently in your campaign the Prisoner Service of the American President Mc Cain. But don't mention the Military Service Campaign of Non President Kerry. By the way, if your opponent has a campaign helper named Rovesky, send your goons after him immediately. Good luck tortured prisoners, wherever you are. You will be rewarded for your pains and tribulations.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

olderwiser — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 14:25:50 GMT

Let's see. What other trials and tribulations might make a good president? How about a big freeway wreck? No. Sole survivor of an airline crash? That ought to play pretty big on the TV. Doesn't really matter about abilities. Just your spectacular trials and tribulations. How about divorce? That's supposed to be real traumatic. Not heroic, though. Scratch divorce. We'll keep looking and report back.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

cbretana — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 14:44:04 GMT

I have an idea, If torture makes you more qualified for President, we should force both candidates to read and digest the blog entries of all the folks on this blog who completely miss the point. People, it doesn't take but a few seconds to read something and digest it... NOONE SAID BEING A POW MAKES YOU QUALIFIED TO BE PRESIDENT. NOONE SAID IT. NOONE.

Repeating something over and over and over and over (it's just nauseating, no???!! )

DOES NOT MAKE IT TRUE.

And attacking a position that NOONE HAS PROPOSED is just as nauseating. This is called setting up a strawman", and then knocking it down...

Get a clue. learn to present an argument on substance for a change.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

thehappyamerican — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 14:49:24 GMT

It's not about captivity..but an idiot genral ignoring McCains' post-military experience. An idiot general insulting other military peoples contribtions as if he was an expert on what it takes to be president.

it's about Obama surounding himself with idiots like this!

You can tell a lot about a person by who his friends are and the company he keeps!

This idiot genral is friends with Obama. The genral should should associate with people of better charracter.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Isabella38 — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 14:50:32 GMT

cbretana.....grazie il mio amico

I appreciate your response, I truly meant no disrespect towards your service to this country. We may all have different opinions, and we each may support a different candidate because we believe them to be the best man for the job, but in the end, we are all Americans who love this country. We all want what's best for it. Thank you again.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Concerned Ctzn — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 15:28:05 GMT

An Officer and a Gentleman.

Gooo Johnny Mac!

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Murray Rizberg — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 16:22:11 GMT

The only thing I can firmly conclude from visiting this message board (or any other one, for that matter) is that the average right-winger - which is not to say ALL right-wingers - is a paranoid, delusional, immature simpleton who makes declarations with nary a particle of evidence to back up these declarations. And the average left-winger isn't better by leaps and bounds, either.

A few examples:

1) HappyDay41 wrote: "Why doesnt' he use his whole name, "Barack H. Obama, Jr." as listed in Senate records? (Or is his name "Barack Hussein Obama, II" as listed on what he claims to be his birth certificate?) . . . Do you know for sure who this guy is?"

The obvious follow-up is simple: why doesn't John McCain use HIS whole name? Is he secretly an IRA terrorist? Is he plotting some attack? Do you know for sure who this guy is, HappyDay41?

2) schlng wrote: You guys are all phonies working for the Obama camp! "....I was a Military pilot and I agree with Clark...I am a career military man and staunch Republican and I agree with Clark..... I was a Republican But now I am leaning towards Obama......." And the list goes on! Obama has so many people on his payroll that it is not even funny! And yes he has bloggers on it too! Most of his money goes toward media spin!"

Ohhhhhh, so EVERBODY posting anything remotely pro-Obama is on his payroll. We're all out to take down John McCain, and wrose yet, we're all getting paid to do it! It's almost as if you believe there is some sort of "vast left-wing conspiracy" out there trying to take down John McCain. Hmm . . . that's funny, when Hillary Clinton said that there was a "vast right-wing conspiracy" to take down her husband, the conservatives called her crazy. Well, who's crazy now, schlang?

3) phpeters87 believes that "if Obama is elected, we will need to reinstate the draft because no one will want to join the military voluntarily with Obama as CIC"

This is an example of the stupid Republican. You see, phpeters87, if Obama were elected, MORE people would volunteer for the military because - unlike John McCain - Barack Obama is not talking about sending troops out to fight any war at any time. This fact means that young people would be more likely to enlist because they could confidently feel that they would not be abused the way Bush, Cheney, Rummy and, yes, John "100 Years in Iraq/Bomb, bomb Iran" McCain have been abusing the military the last six years. (And abusing the military they have been doing, ph: not only did Bush & Co. lie to get these soldiers into an unnecessary war, they also cut benefits to these soldiers THREE TIMES before the Democratic congress took over. And the GOP still claims it is the only party that "supports our troops" - with support like that, who needs real enemies?)

I could go on and on and on, but what's the point? Not only is the average right-winger paranoid, delusional and immature, he /she also has an incredible aversion to facts, evidence and reality. With an electorate this ignorant, it's no wonder George W. Bush needed to insure himself only one major state to "win" his two elections.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Driver of wagons — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 16:51:52 GMT

Murray Rizberg, good points all of them

Thank you

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

mcleodmn — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 17:48:17 GMT

McCain is physically and mentally compromised. That is all I need to know.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

olderbutnowiser — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 18:23:59 GMT

There is a photo on the internet taken during the Natl. Anthem, with Obama and others onstage in front of the American flag. The caption points out that Obama cannot raise his hand to his heart, while all the others do so. Frankly, his P.R. people should have encouraged him to do so, because with this simple little act of (dis)respect for this country, he lost my 9and thousands of others) vote.

I question his agenda......

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

orion12 — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 18:54:42 GMT

When I contributed to this debate as comment number 2 yesterday, I did so thinking that agreeing with Clark was perhaps too daring. I am glad to see that there are so many people who have their eyes open. After reading all the comments I cannot help thinking what motivates us as humans!!

The facts are clear.

1. McCain was a prisoner of war. NOBODY has neither denied that nor has anyone minimized his service. Clark and Obama have recognized this. So have nearly everyone on this blog.

2. McCain's suffering is not a prerequisite for being president. It does not make him eligible for president. This is what Clark was saying.

It seems that some people do not, under any circumstance, want to hear anything about this topic. This is somewhat disappointing. I sense some people are not mature enough to assess a simple statement withing the context of requirements for being president. Some of us need to work hard at analyzing situations during this campaign so that we can contribute effectively to the debate, instead of insulting others.

One question that we need to look at and objectively is this; how does the trauma of being captive in a war situation affect the ability of someone to effectivey govern as president of the USA. Now, I do not want a lot of hotheaded reactions because this is counter-productive. Can it affect McCain negatively? Has his profile shown that voters should be concerned about this? (The point is McCain has made his combat service an issue, so questions will surely be asked). There are comments from fellow republicans regarding his temper. Is this linked to his combat experience? There are proven cases of how soldiers coming from combat have become violent and irrational (Proven). There are suggestions that by association to Wright, Obama is a hothead (Not proven). We need to ask ourselves these questions so that the right person gets put into the White House.

This is not a comment to put down McCain at all. What may seem politically incorrect to mention today may, in hindsight be a mistake to have overlooked. There have been other cases of the mental state of a candidate being brought up and that cost him dearly. Is it possible for experts to look at the mental makeup of our two candidates to assess risks? After all these are guys who would be giving the final word to lunch a nuclear bomb!!

What I would like to see in these discussions are some reasoned discussions based on credible information. Not emotional explosions and insults against any of the candidates or their supporters.

Finally the press will always be the press. They blow up simple issues and make them important. But that is because they are the press in the US, where people appear to be led by what they read or get from TV. If the population show ssome maturity the press would have to work harder to be more analytical, rather than sensational.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Wired — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 18:55:08 GMT

For crying out loud,Wesley Clark WAS NOT attacking McCains military service or heroism ! The media needs to stop making a mountain out of a mole hill just because its a slow news day. Can we talk about the issues that are hurting average Americans right now ? Exaggerating sound bites is NOT journalism, its gossip.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Wired — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 18:57:07 GMT

olderbutnowiser : You are beating a conspiracy theory to death my friend. That argument is so old and has been proven wrong so many times. Dont be be sheep.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Wired — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 19:01:09 GMT

Also, people need to see the ENTIRE interview that led up to Clarks comments. But the news media wont play the whole thing because they know it will kill the controversy. He was responding to a question that was specifically ask about McCains service in Vietnam. Clark didnt bring this up out of the blue. DO YOUR RESEARCH PEOPLE ! STAY OFF OF YOUTUBE !

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

olderwiser — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 19:07:44 GMT

Well, I see that my blog name has been highjacked by olderbutnowiser. Thanks for the compliment. I see, also, that you have found an act of disrespect in one of the candidates for not raising his hand to his heart. Have you checked his car for any bumper stickers? Maybe those are disrespectful, too. One cannot be president if he does not put his hand too his heart and wear a flag pin. I take it by your salutation that this is an agenda of disrespect.Well, so many different ideas go into a vote.

I think that a lot of people voted for Bush for some strange reasons. One of those was because he was a cowboy. He had been an alcoholic. A lot of people voted for him for the period before he dried out. Those were the drinkers. And a lot of people voted for him because he quit. Those were the teetotalers. A lot of the mentally impaired voted for him.

Someone has argued below that Mc Cain is not being presented as a good candidate because he was a prisoner. I disagree. This is always stated as a qualification to be commander in chief and even president, the fact that he was a pilot who was a prisoner of war. All the time.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

olderwiser — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 19:14:12 GMT

I think that those who wear lapel flags are not patriotic because the flags are way too small. The only legitimate patriotic lapel flags are four inches wide and three inches tall with a five inch flagpole only on the left. Those with the flagpole on the right are not patriotic. They must be on the wearer's left lapel only. Those on the right lapel are not acceptable as patriotic. If you have a chance when you see a four by three lapel pin worn on the wrong side, just sneak a look underneath were you will find a pledge to Mohammed written on the back.

Anyone with the little tiny lapel flag pins doesn't count any more than a blank lapel. Not patriotic.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

cbretana — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 20:23:01 GMT

orion12,

Might I mildly disagree... I don't think that question deserves to even be asked. It's silly. It's not even _wrong_ ! The correct question, is

"What does an individual's behavior and judgment, when under great stress and trauma say about his character? "

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Jose52 — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 20:27:11 GMT

News and Notes concisely put this issue to a peaceful and final rest. Obama has no control over fools like poor wesly to insult John and point the focus on all of BARACK's shortcomings . All of McCain's friends and staff respect and honor the senator too keep control of the spin. The shame of Mr. Black's comment, and the media agrees, that it was truthful and upfront. Americans will vote for security and defense. The Lib bloggers are pushing the left agenda and are getting too emotional where by their hate truly comes out. Romano's articles have a history of stiring up trouble, where the Libs get upset for him asking the questions that need to be asked or putting out points i.e. Barack not being truthful about McCain' not being Bush III. The Right needs to to have faith and focus on the facts. John McC will remain steady. May God bless our America. Hoorah!

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Driver of wagons — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 21:08:28 GMT

Note that Gen. Clark's statement is not specific to John McCain or any other war hero. It says, plainly and simply, that wartime sacrifices like being shot down -- while they may be admirable and worthy of deep gratitude - do not by themselves prove that one has sound military judgment.

My biggest problem with Sullivan's statement is the word "revere." That's the perfect word to describe the media's treatment of McCain's military past. The dictionary definition of "revere" is "to regard with awe, deference, and devotion." Wes Clark's biggest sin, in their eyes, is that he's not supplicating himself before McCain's heroism. And why not? Maybe because Clark also served in Vietnam and showed extraordinary heroism himself, risking his life many times (and spending many long months immobilized from his injuries.)

But guess what/ You didn't hear about his heroism -- or his sacrifice -- when Gen. Clark was running for president. Why not? Because he's consistent. He didn't think it qualified him to be president, any more than it qualifies John McCain. (He's also a little classier than some when it comes to that kind of self-promotion.) Clark honors McCain's sacrifice, and even called McCain one of his heroes on the Schieffer interview (we haven't heard much about that these last couple of days.) But he knows it takes a different set of skills to lead.

Now, back to that logic problem. The basis for the chain of outrage now binding Sen. Obama and the Democrats -- a bright shining chain, one with links named Schieffer and Sullivan -- is this argument: 1) John McCain is a war hero. 2) You can't question a war hero's judgment in military affairs. 3) You must therefore accept his wisdom in these matters. 4) You role is to revere him, demonstrate your devotion, and abstain from criticism.

But wait! Wes Clark is a war hero! He made his McCain comment while he was discussing military affairs! Your criticism of him means you don't accept his judgment in these matters! In other words, you're doing the same thing to Clark that Clark was doing to McCain. Your demonstrated lack of reverence for war hero Clark is a heresy that is equal to or greater than Clark's.

Q.E.D. -- and in your face, outrage contingent. And as for the Democrats, they should learn from Gen. Clark's directness ... and his unwillingness to back down. He has led by example yet again. He has refused to buckle, despite enormous pressure. And what do you call somebody like that?

Oh, yeah. A hero.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Driver of wagons — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 21:08:57 GMT

McCain's full-throated chorus of defenders has boxed itself into a logical trap: If you buy the idea that Wes Clark's comment about John McCain was outrageous, then it's outrageous to criticize him!

Before I present my argument, a little context. First, we are not wasting our time by continuing to discuss Gen. Clark's simple and irrefutable assertion. The McCain campaign and the media will keep repeating the mantra that McCain is "extraordinarily qualified" on defense issues, despite his lack of executive experience and a series of errors in judgment. Anybody challenging that idea will face the same heat now being directed at Wes Clark.

If you've been in a sensory-deprivation experiment lately (in which case, lucky you!) here's the quick and dirty version: When confronted with Gen. Clark's assertion that McCain's heroism didn't necessarily qualify him for high command, an outraged Bob Schieffer's non sequitur response was that Barack Obama had never been shot down in an airplane. The General responded with the (seemingly irrefutable) statement that having been shot down in a plane does not constitute prima facie evidence of leadership skills. That's been blaring from television screens for 48 hours now -- albeit neatly excised from the question that stimulated it, which makes it look more like an ad hominem attack by some hopped-up partisan.

(Look on the bright side: That's left the networks with no airtime for any new Jeremiah Wright footage!)

The result was a tidal wave of faux outrage (or genuine -- which is worse?) like this, from Andrew Sullivan:

Wesley Clark is now and always has been a Clinton-type (note: talk about ad hominem!), but this is pretty revolting. This kind of personal attack was repulsive coming against Kerry from the far right. And it's repulsive the other way round. Both Kerry and McCain served their country honorably; and their records should be revered, period. You can make an argument against McCain's foreign policy experience and judgment on its merits. Do it and leave this crap out of it.

I would tend to agree, actually -- if it weren't for the fact that Sen. McCain and his supporters (especially in the media) are incessantly trumpeting his wartime experience as a qualification. Without it, he'd be just one more senator who made the wrong call on Iraq. Worse, actually -- he'd be one who gets confused about even the most elementary national defense facts.

Then there's the fact that the Swift Boat attacks on Kerry were outrageous because they were false, whereas Gen. Clark's statement is ... what's that other word? Oh, yeah. True. (Is anybody really arguing otherwise?)?

Continued below:

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Nins — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 21:11:59 GMT

Why did the US military cancel a news conference where they were going to display the "Iranian" weapons that they found in Iraq? Because there WERE NO IRANIAN weapons to display. Here are links supporting the fact that the weapons found in Iraq did not come from Iran:

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2008_05/013695.php

http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2008/05/fire_next_time.html

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/babylonbeyond/2008/05/iraq-the-elusiv.html

NOT TO MENTION that the Untied States itself has had a notable role in arming the insurgency. When the US dissolved the Iraqi Army, that flooded Iraq with weapons. More recently the Pentagon admitted that it had lost track of a third of the weapons distributed to Iraqi security forces in 2004-05, totaling 190,000 assault rifles and pistols that are currently on the streets of iraq. The British paper that published this article got it's information straight from the US Government Accounting Office's public website: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/pentagon-admits-190000-weapons-missing-in-iraq-460551.html

Ask yourself, why would America want to pretend that Iran is pushing weapons in Iraq, when actually WE (the USA) has flooded Iraq's streets with weapons? Because Bush wants to declare war on Iran, and just like the fake "WMDs" in Iraq, he needs something to frighten Americans, so he comes out with this BS about Iran killing US soldiers in Iraq. He has also said that Iran is making nuclear weapons, but recent inspections have found NO EVIDENCE of nuclear weapons in Iran. JUST LIKE how repeated inspections found NO EVIDENCE of WMDs in Iraq. The reports of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the UN inspectors and nuclear experts at the Institute for Strategic and International Studies (ISIS) all agree that Iran DOES NOT have nuclear weapons. The IAEA report states that Iran only has "low enriched uranium, not the highly-enriched uranium necessary to produce a bomb." The ISIS reports states "It is important to note that they do not encompass the full scope of work required for a comprehensive nuclear weapons program. Missing is theoretical work on nuclear weapons, uranium metallurgy, and the development of a neutron initiator." http://www.yirmeyahureview.com/articles/2008/iaea_report_on_iran.htm#_ftn9

In case you think the idea that Bush wants to bomb Iran is reactionary, you should know that John Bolton, former US Ambassador to the UN, recently told FoxNews that he can "definitely envision Bush bombing Iran before he leaves office." By bombing Iran, Bush makes it more likely McCain will be elected. But can the US Treasury, can the US economy stand more war? Even if we could afford it, we don't have the manpower in uniform. You know what that means: draft and conscription. Vote for McCain. Watch your children come home in body bags. Watch Bush get richer, watch America go into a Great Depression.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Driver of wagons — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 21:12:27 GMT

Me thinks the hardliner "Rovebots" jumped and spoke on this one way to soon. they would ahve been better off just letting it lay think about what was actually said and then comment on it. But Noooooooooo they couldn't do that so now they are made to look the fools

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

starfire8181 — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 21:17:45 GMT

Why is it that everyone seems to think that you have to heave military experience to be president. One of the main reasons the the President is the commander in chief is that he was not usually military, it was meant to be a CIVILIAN in charge of the military. And I would rather have someone who I think will listen to advisors and have sound judgment like Obama, than someone who time and again has gone off the handle, and can not control their anger.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Driver of wagons — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 21:19:41 GMT

Nins

It has been known for quite some time that Jr and the Devil are going to Bomb Iran before he/they leave office if he/they dont do it it will be because they haven't had another Pearl Harbor type of happening involving Iran. All reads do point in that direction.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Bass Pro — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 21:20:41 GMT

John McCain is more than a Patriot, He's a maker of Patroits. Those Patriots who have been sent to die in iraq in a war cooked up by the GOP should salute him. I don't mean litterally of course. They're dead. But the ones that will die later if he's elected should be glad he's there for them.

A vote for mcCain is a vote to murder soldiers. How much more patriotic can one get?

Imagine a person willing to kill young men and women just so he can get the votes of the mouth-breathing far right. What a Hero!

bell12

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Bass Pro — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 21:23:32 GMT

starfire8181, How can you say that. what about Bush? oh yeah, he was kept hidden away. Well whay about Cheney? oh yeah deferred.

Never mind.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

cbretana — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 21:42:09 GMT

Driver of wagons, you are at least addressing the substance of the issue, and not simply making rude ad hominem attacks or irrelevant analogies…

But to your points…

near the bottom of your first post:

1. < … if it weren't for the fact that Sen. McCain and his supporters (especially in the media) are incessantly trumpeting his wartime experience as a qualification.>

I don’t believe Senator McCain has EVER trumpeted, ( touted, listed, or otherwise characterized) “his wartime experience as a qualification”.. What “his supporters have or have not done is a separate issue, highly dependant on whom you include in that list, and not germane to this argument…

2. < Without it, he'd be just one more senator who made the wrong call on Iraq. Worse, actually -- he'd be one who gets confused about even the most elementary national defense facts> “wrong call on Iraq”, sir? Is this not an opinion? If you are trying to make an argument, stick to facts… This, sir, is obviously not an established fact…. It’s sort of at the coie of what the entire election is about, no? So it does your argument little good to tout it as a supporting fact.

As to the “confused” comment… You criticize others about ad hominem attacks, and then take this cheap shot?

3. < Swift Boat attacks on Kerry were outrageous because they were false, whereas Gen. Clark's statement is ... what's that other word? Oh, yeah. True>

If you have read the swift boat book, you’ll know that most of what they had to say was more likely true than Kerry’s account of the same events. There are more witnesses on their side, with better vantage points, and less political motivations to lie… Noone who was not there knows for sure, but it certainly not a slam dumk in either direction, and we know Kerry lied about being in Cambodia on Christmas Eve, that’s documented and indisputable. Unlike Hillary and Bosnian Snipers, there was no media coverage of the Swift Boat incident to pull out and play on the news…

But to the other side of the point It’s obvious that what Clark said was true, Just exactly like saying that “Obama’s not wearing a Lapel pin doesn’t qualify him to be president” It’s true, of course, but who GAS? It’s irrelevant… Wearing a Lapel pin doesn’t qualify him for President either! Just like Not getting shot down doesn’t qualift McCain either! These are stupid, silly irrelevant comments that serve only as an excuse to say something negative about the candidate. And that’s why they make Clark look mean-spirited, arrogant, and rude.

4. < The basis for … -- is this argument: 1) John McCain is a war hero. 2) You can't question a war hero's judgment in military affairs. 3) You must therefore accept his wisdom in these matters. 4….>

Straw-Man, wagon driver… You’re stating the other guys argument for him, in a way no-one would themselves state it, so you can shoot it down. This is bad debate technique # 12… and very effective when done skillfully. <Not!>

5. And oh btw, what do you think makes someone a hero? Bearing great pain? Being tortured? Voting the way you believe even when only 44% of the electorate agrees with you ? Wearing you hair long ? Criticizing the government in these United States in the year 2008? What’s your criteria?

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

cbretana — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 21:49:22 GMT

Hey BassPro,

I got one for you...

"A vote for Obama is a vote to circumcise our teen-age daughters ! "

How does that sound to you? reasonable? thoughtful? tolerant? Intelligent?

Your comments say more about you than they do about your opposition.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

sharenews — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 22:42:01 GMT

Op-Ed Columnist

THE NEW YORK TIMES

THE TWO OBAMAS - Dr. Barack and Fast Eddie Obama

By DAVID BROOKS

Published: June 20, 2008

Full Article: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/20/opinion/20brooks.html?em&ex=1214193600&en=00c95f8ea46a7c37&ei=5087%0A

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

sharenews — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 22:51:30 GMT

Schlang, this might have a little something to do with the media bias Obama gets for the most part:

Rupert Murdoch endorsed/supports Obama: If you do not know who he is, I will tell you. He is the CEO and chairman of News Corporation, Rupert Murdoch has a huge stake in the world press, including dozens of newspapers, magazines, television channels and websites.

http://observers.france24.com/en/content/20080530-murdoch-praises-obama

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Driver of wagons — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 22:52:53 GMT

david brooks

Ha Ha Ha Ho Ho Ho He He He

Anything he writes is tainted and twisted with his pretzel logic

Extend you inevitable with your vote for McCain

He never learned anything about being an upstanding conservative from Buckley

Buckley is turning in his grave

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Driver of wagons — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 23:36:05 GMT

Man, This is Rich

Johnnie Midnight Strikes Again

Let's keep in mind that no one seems to have argued with Clark on the merits of his claim. No one responded by saying, "General Clark is wrong -- in fact, McCain's POW experience does qualify him to be president." I suppose one could make that argument, but I haven't seen anyone actually make it. Instead, what they have said is that Clark was out of bounds to even raise the issue. To even assert that McCain's Vietnam experience isn't in and of itself a qualification for the Oval Office is such an unforgivable transgression that its merits don't need to be addressed.

There is, however, one person who wouldn't disagree with Clark's statement that being a POW doesn't qualify you for the presidency. When asked by the National Journal in 2003, "Do you think that military service inherently makes somebody better equipped to be commander-in-chief?" this politician answered, "ABSOLUTELY NOT". History shows that some of our greatest leaders have had little or no military experience. ... When one advises [a presidential candidate] that they should be very careful about how much you talk about that, because you don't want it to sound self-serving." The politician who said "ABSOLUTELY NOT" was John McCain, and the presidential candidate he was talking about was John Kerry.

Ha Ha Ha Ho Ho Ho He He He

"McCain't and isn't able to Govern" is a mere mirage of himself

extend your inevitable PAIN with your vote for McCain

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Wired — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 01:21:09 GMT

Clark didnt even bring up McCains service, why cant people understand the full context of the interview ? Sad....and BTW....if McCain supporters think his service qualifies him to be the Pres....then they must think Bush is unqualified ? I

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Nins — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 02:14:25 GMT

Why did the US military cancel a news conference where they were going to display the "Iranian" weapons they found in Iraq? Because there WERE NO IRANIAN WEAPONS to display. Here are links supporting the fact that the weapons found in Iraq did not come from Iran:

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2008_05/013695.php

http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2008/05/fire_next_time.html

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/babylonbeyond/2008/05/iraq-the-elusiv.html

NOT TO MENTION that the Untied States itself has had a notable role in arming the insurgency. When the US dissolved the Iraqi Army, that flooded Iraq with weapons. More recently the Pentagon admitted that it had lost track of a third of the weapons distributed to Iraqi security forces in 2004-05, totaling 190,000 assault rifles and pistols that are currently on the streets of Iraq. The British paper that published this article got it's information straight from the US Government Accounting Office's public website:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/pentagon-admits-190000-weapons-missing-in-iraq-460551.html

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Wired — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 02:28:10 GMT

Why are people more upset over McCain possibly getting his feelings hurt instead of all the natural disasters we are having right now ? How about the broken education system ? Endangered species? High gas prices ? Growing poverty ? Homeless children ?

All this energy is focused on the wrong topic.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

tslog — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 02:36:14 GMT

Are we going to tell our children that no experience is the best experience, no work is the best work, and no qualification is the best qualification? Gen. Clark, please think before you talk. To have Gen. Clark as his advisor, Obama showed his lack of judgement again.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

sharenews — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 03:05:19 GMT

To Wired. You said: Why are people more upset over McCain possibly getting his feelings hurt instead of all the natural disasters we are having right now ?

I say: Because we are Americans and we love our country and the men and women who have found so long and hard for our freedom, and we dont like seeing a recognized military hero and POW (McCain) getting his service to this country minimized and cast aside as no big deal, especially coming from a supposedly respected Gen. Clark who did not have the decency to take back his ill willed (political-driven) comment about McCains military service. Thats why. And doing it just the week before the 4th of July. Another judgment call gone wrong having this Gen Clark support him as an advisor. Geesh.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Politicswithagrin — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 03:05:57 GMT

Driver of Wagons:

The fact that no one argued with General Clark on the merits of the claims is exactly the point. As Romano points out, Clark's points were "obvious." General Clark was criticizing a non-existent assertion. In the "Why John McCain" section of his website, McCain doesn't even mention his military service. He bases the "why" on his policies. Obviously General Clark is not supporting McCain for president, but he should have based his critique on McCain's policies.

http://politicswithagrin.blogspot.com/

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Murray Rizberg — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 03:32:54 GMT

OK, schlang, here we go again. You wrote the following:

"I did not say that everyone was, But it is a known fact, and it has been reported on one of the major news networks that Obama hires Bloggers. "Mr. Slick" with his "well oiled machine" for a campaign is up to more no-good than many are willing to accept or admit to! When I see these stupid blogs with people pretending to be on the far right and staunch military personal start talking against McCain, I know something is up. This is Obama's way of swift boating McCain supporters over to his side. And did you notice, with the controversy over Clark's statement about McCain's military service not qualifying him to be commander in Chief, was used by Obama to make it about Obama? Funny how Obama made a statement: , " I do not encourage anybody to question my political opponents patriotism and I will not idley stand by while others question mine"? First, The issue was not about patriotism. It was about McCain's ability to be commader in chief based on his Military experience. Second, Obama was using that as a platform to wipe away the truth about his Non-existant ablitites to be commander in chief and his total lack of Military achievement. Obama does encourage this because he is in cahouts with the whole strategey. He just wants people to think that he is "Mr. Clean Politics" by pretending that he is distancing himself from those comments after they have been made. But He is actually glad that they were made because he thinks that this gives him a chance to level the playing field in the eyes of the public since he has no Military achievements . . . etc, etc, etc, blah, blah, blah!"

OK, where do I start?

1) Technically speaking, you did not say "everyone," but you did say "YOU guys ARE ALL phonies WORKING FOR THE OBAMA CAMP" - that sounds like "everyone" to me. And even in the more specific sense - that is, if you meant "everyone" to mean "those who profess to be military personnel who are not backing McCain" - you are still delusional. Are you really convinced that everybody who posts a message on a public forum claiming to be in the military and supporting Obama is nothing but a blogger on the Obama payroll? My God, man - you're even simpler than I could have imagined! Obviously this country is much more diverse than you could ever understand. Even my father - who hasn't voted for a non-Republican EVER - has admitted that he is considering voting for Obama! Wake up and look around, my friend: the world is not nearly as black-and-white as you believe it to be.

2) When you say that Obama is up to "more no-good than many are willing to accept," I have to wonder: a) Exactly what KIND of no-good are you talking about - flying jets into skyscrapers? Poisoning our drinking water? Cancelling "American Idol"? Or perhaps you are referring to no-good things like insuring habeas corpus? Or keeping the Department of Justice independent and free from politics? Or not lying to the entire world in order to start an unnecesary war? Please tell! b) What proof do you have that Senator Obama is up to no good? I'm guessing you have none, unless you count things you hear on Rush Limbaugh or Neal Boortz's radio shows to be "proof." This statement makes you seem quite paranoid, my friend, which only gives credence to my earlier description of the average Republican, of course (thanks!).

3)Then you have the nerve to claim that this entire situation is "Obama's way of 'swiftboating' McCain" in order to snatch his voters. I'm going to explain this once and only once; if you can't understand it, it's not my problem: the "Swiftboat Veterans" launched an all-out character assassination on John Kerry back in 2004; this process involved making unsubstantiated - and to this day unproven - claims that Senator Kerry not only LIED about his service in Vietnam in order to receive his service medals, but that he then returned to the US and unpatriotically ratted on his fellow servicemen and superiors by testifying on Capitol Hill about the atrocities he had witnessed in an effort to end our involvement in Vietnam. Retired General Wesley Clark, on the other hand, prefaced his statement more famous statement ("Well, I don’t think riding in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to be president") with THIS statement: ”I CERTAINLY HONOR HIS SERVICE AS A PRISONER OF WAR. HE WAS A HERO TO ME AND TO HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS AND MILLIONS OF OTHERS IN THE ARMED FORCES, AS A PRISONER OF WAR." Now, schlang, do you see a decided difference between actual "swiftboating" and phony outraged, GOP-alleged "swiftboating"? And do you see why it should piss off the entire country that Republicans continue to be the most hypocritical bastards in politics? Not only did almost no Republican come to the defense of Senator Kerry as he was being systematically destroyed by the right-wing and its all-too-eager allies in the mainstream media, the GOP now has the gall to come out and claim that Obama, Clark and the Democrats are trying to swiftboat John McCain because of Clark's very rational and very respectful comments about John McCain's experiences and qualifications? Give me a break! If you can't see how the two situations are completely different, you are either the biggest moron in the universe or you're Karl Rove in disguise.

That's probably a much larger amount of facts and logic than you can handle at one time, schlang, so let's leave it at that. Have a great night; I hope Barack Obama doesn't pop up with a meat cleaver in his hands in your paranoid dreams tonight, my friend.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Wired — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 04:07:50 GMT

Sharenews : Have you even seen the interview where Clark said this ? You are not even speaking on the context of the interview. You are just repeating smear lines. Also Clark did not randomly bring this up before the 4th of July. He was asked this question man ! He did not direct the question !

EVERYONE PLEASE WATCH THE INTERVIEW AND WAKE UP ! WESLEY CLARK WAS NOT CRITICIZING MCAIN ! He was prasing McCain for his service WAY before the "controversial comment".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MpsI-RBTvFg&feature=related

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Wired — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 04:10:17 GMT

Is every fighter pilot who has been shot down in war qualified to be President ? Of course not ! That was the ONLY point Clark was making ! Stop it people !

WATCH THE VIDEO ! HE DID NOT DIRECT THE COMMENT ! HE WAS RESPONDING !

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MpsI-RBTvFg&feature=related

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

HDavidson — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 07:48:26 GMT

Hey schlang, that may be the funniest thing I've ever read, thank you. YEAH IT DOES MAKE A DIFFERENCEwho your daddy is. 20hrs of combat and 32 propaganda films does not a hero make. Now what "military" experience" has to do with being president of the US, I have NO idea, that what the MILITARY IS FOR!!! DUH!

Bush had NO experience well except 1yrs AWOL, and some cocaine, and look at all he accomplished...lol. McCain spent most all of his time in prison WILLINGLY doing propaganda films, the VC called him the "SONG BIRD" (google it). He is a survivor, and he did "sreve" but a hero...not so much. If he has nothing to hide, open his file and let's havea look...hmmm?

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Driver of wagons — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 13:39:56 GMT

This is also Rich:

Johnnie Midnight is at it again

There's a myth out there that the McCain campaign and the media have cooperated to create. It says that John McCain is reluctant to exploit his Vietnam POW story for political advantage, so modest and full of integrity is he. We've seen this repeated again and again, not just by McCain and his supporters but by reporters who ought to know better.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

From the first time he ran for Congress in 1982 up to the present day, McCain has made his POW story the centerpiece of his entire political career. The key moment of that 1982 campaign was when he responded to his opponent's (absolutely true) accusation that McCain was a carpetbagger by saying, "As a matter of fact, when I think about it now, the place I lived longest in my life was Hanoi." At every point since, it has been the deft use of this tool that has brought McCain renewed attention or won him a key victory.

McCain has every right to talk about Vietnam all he wants -- it's his story, and no serious person has ever disputed the details that are available. But don't tell us he's reluctant to use it, because he isn't. He talks about it to voters, he talks about it to contributors, he talks about it to reporters, he talks about it with seriousness, he jokes about it, and his campaign makes every attempt it can to remind people of what happened to him in Vietnam.

But what happened with Gen. Clark reveals the McCain Rules, as he and the press would have us understand them. Here's how things are supposed to work: It's fine for the McCain campaign to run ads touting his time as a POW, create web videos touting his time as a POW, have him mention his time as a POW in speeches, and have him bring it up in debates (remember "I was tied up at the time"?). In other words, it's fine to have John McCain's entire presidential run be presented through the filter of his POW experience. Should, however, someone even ask the question of whether the fact that McCain was a POW really qualifies him to be president, that would be a deeply offensive affront to all that is right and good, and must not be tolerated. Talk about having it both ways.

As assuredly as the last 7 + years in the States has been unbelievably lame it will, even more assuredly continue with your vote for McCain

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Murray Rizberg — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 14:41:46 GMT

There's one problem with your argument, Politicswithagrin. You said the following: "The fact that no one argued with General Clark on the merits of the claims is exactly the point. As Romano points out, Clark's points were "obvious." General Clark was criticizing a non-existent assertion. In the "Why John McCain" section of his website, McCain doesn't even mention his military service. He bases the "why" on his policies."

All of that can be true, but you left out one critical thing: even if John McCain does not mention his military experience as a qualification for being President - and, more specifically, a qualification for being "strong on defense" - the number one reason more people believe McCain is "stronger on defense" and "more capable of dealing with the Iraq War" IS his experience in Vietnam. So, while Wesley Clark was not addressing a qualification that John McCain himself has claimed to have on his website, Wesley Clark was addressing something the gerneral public perceives to be a qualification of John McCain's on the matter of foreign policy. Thus, the retired general's point was NOT obvious; that is, if his point were so obvious, why had nobody in the media ever made the assertion before General Clark did so? Since so many people cite McCain's military experience as the reason they trust him more than Barack Obama to defend our country, it is mere fair play for anybody - especially a retired military man - to ask why people believe McCain's military experience is valuable and deconstruct these reasons.

Naturally the media does not present this story from this very valid and very logical perspective. No, as usual, the media takes its cue from the Republican National Committee and frames the story around the completely irrational and faux-outraged reaction of John McCain and the rest of the Republican Party and its operatives. The Republican Party has long had the mainstream media firmly in its grip - so much so that they have most of the general public believing that the mainstream media has a "liberal bias" when, in fact, the complete opposite is true; now it is mere formality for the mainstream media to present its stories from the perspective of the GOP. I can recall very few instances of anybody in the mainstream media declaring that it was "foolish" of the Swiftboat Veterans to attack the integrity of John Kerry's military service, even though they were attacking with nothing more than a bunch of unsubstantiated claims from long-time conservative supporters; flash forward to 2008, and suddenly the media is declaring Wesley Clark and the Democrats foolish for "attacking McCain's military record" - EVEN THOUGH WESLEY CLARK NEVER ATTACKED MCCAIN'S MILITARY RECORD IN THE FIRST PLACE! Again, if you cannot see the double standard in these two cases, it is either because you're one of the dumbest people on earth or one of the most willfully ignorant people on earth.

You can believe what you want, or you can believe in reality. It's up to you.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

amendment2man — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 15:40:25 GMT

military service provides structure to thinking and assurance that you have proper reactions under stress. it will emphasize this quality in individuals that have it and develope itin those that do not have it to a large extent.

if you have military service exp. expecialy combat experience it demonstrates the ability to handle stress and unexpected situations. Mccain does have this, obama does not.

simple! oh are these posters for obama hired by him it seems they may be in my opinion.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Murray Rizberg — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 16:36:09 GMT

No, amendment2man, combat experience in and of itself does not "demonstrate the ability to handle stress and unexpected situations" - ONE'S ACTIONS in combat experience demonstrates the ability to handle stress and unexpected situations. Even then, combat experience is JUST ONE WAY of demonstrating the ability to handle stress and unexpected situations. Here's another: having a woman high on crack cocaine jump on the hood of your car in order to escape the assault of a very large man also high on crack cocaine. The point is, McCain has the combat experience that Obama does not to demonstrate an abilityt to handle stress; likewise, there are many non-combat experiences that McCain does not have that demonstrate Barack Obama's ability to handle stress. Or do you believe that Obama never came face-to-face with any stressful situations in his charmed life as the son of a white woman and a black father?

NOT so simple!

Oh, by the way - just a little advice: when you merely hint at the fact that you believe every person who puts up a pro-Obama message on this board is being paid by the Obama campaign, you look completely paranoid and, thus, lose any credibility you might have earned with any common sense (but since your post was almost completely free of common sense, you don't have to worry about it in this case).

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Nins — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 16:51:37 GMT

Did you know McCain has had 4 different campaign managers? McCain just can't get it right. He keeps changing managers, as if it is their fault that he can not succeed. Fact is, McCain is NOT a good candidate.

After his first run at the Presidency when he got swift boated by Bush, his manager John Weaver got McCain to play "Maverick" and cross party lines to become a NeoLiberal. McCain almost changed parties and became a Democrat and Kerry's running mate, but at the 11th hour he switched horses again and hired Terry Nelson to manage him. Nelson is a strong GOP establishmentarianist, and got McCain to throw himself behind Bush, with promises of the GOP giving him the 2008 nomination. But Nelson didn't last, because the strategy failed. The right wing was suspicious of McCain because McCain voted against abortion, for gay rights and for gun control during his "maverick" phase. They didn't know if they could trust him. Also, Nelson spent money hand over fist, nearly bankrupting McCain's campaign. So he replaced him with Rick Davis, who was at the helm for the past year. Davis is a fiscal conservative, made McCain sell that expensive big bus, and made McCain mind his manners and act polite in public. But now, Davis has been fired too. Why? Because McCain is getting desperate, and the gloves are coming off. His new manager is Steve Schmidt, a Rove disciple and former Rove employee. McCain has also hired Nicole Wallace and Greg Jenkins to head his "Communications Team." Nic and Greg are also former Rove employees, masters of the art of swift boat smear campaigns. McCain going to let the Rove bulldogs off the leash. Look out, America, this is going to get ugly.

My prediction: the 20% of America that is made up of ignorant jingoists will be cheering to see Rove's bloody tactics. But you know what? They were all going to vote for McCain anyway. The rest of America will be so disgusted by the hatchet work of the NeoCons that they will vote AGAINST McCain.

The "last resort" tactic of the GOP to win this election will be to bomb Iran, starting another war. Mark my words, if McCain is not doing well in September, Bush will bomb Iran. He is already setting the stage for this, by saying that Iran has nuclear weapons, even thought inspections by the United Nations and the International Atomic Energy Agency have both found NO EVIDENCE of nuclear weapons. REMIND YOU OF ANYTHING? It's the fake "weapons of mass destruction" all over again.

Did you know that on June 26, Bush, very quietly, declared a state of National Emergency? During a National Emergency the President can DECLARE WAR without waiting for the approval of Congress.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2008/06/20080626-4.html

It is going to be a very bumpy ride, America, so hold on, and DON'T LET BUSH AND ROVE STEAL ANOTHER ELECTION. I wouldn't mind so much if they were good for the economy, but let's face it, they're destroying America.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Nins — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 16:52:30 GMT

Murray Rizberg is wonderful! Thanks for the great posts, Murray.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

cbretana — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 17:47:37 GMT

Murry Weizberg,

"All of that can be true, but you left out one critical thing: even if John McCain does not mention his military experience as a qualification for being President - and, more specifically, a qualification for being "strong on defense" - the number one reason more people believe McCain is "stronger on defense" and "more capable of dealing with the Iraq War" IS his experience in Vietnam. "

No, to be specific, it's first, because of what those experiences, and more importantly, what his response to those expereinces, says about his character,

and second, because of how those experiences molded his principles and his convictions...

Kerry was in VietNam too, but how very differently his expereinces affected his principles, character, and convictions.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Murray Rizberg — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 18:31:27 GMT

cbretana: Do you have a problem with the way John Kerry's Vietnam experience molded his principles and convictions? If so, you might want to go into SPECIFICS because right now we can only guess at what you might find wrong with Senator Kerry's prinicples and convictions. Please enlighten us: assuming there are some, with what principles and convictions of John Kerry do you not agree? Why do you not agree with these convictions? And how are these principles and convictions different from John McCain's? Hell, how are they different from YOURS and the way those were formed?

Oh, yeah - thanks for the nice compliment, Nins! And thanks for enlightening me on Bush's declared state of emergency; hadn't heard that one. I just wish Bush would release the executive order he REALLY wants to - you know, the one that states, "I, George W. Bush, President of the United States of America, CAN DO WHATEVER THE HELL I WANT TO!!! Who's gonna stop me - those spineless weasels in the Democrat [sic] Party? Hahahahahahaha! Surely, you jest! OK, now watch this shot!"

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

sharenews — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 18:31:44 GMT

Good post cbretana, very true.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

thehappyamerican — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 20:52:07 GMT

Boldly springing into action The General finds a live microphone and knitting his brows, he pontificates on what it takes to be a president! Confident other liberals will like him if he manages to Swift Boat senator McCain as he wows' the American public threw the microphone!

Swift Boat McCain,HELL! He would Swift BATTLESHIP McCain and then the other liberals will surely let the general hang around!

What the general didn't understand was that his SWIFT BATTLESHIP was actually rubber ducky inflatable ring around his waist!He did no more damage to McCains campaign than a swift whoopey cushion!

Will other Liberals let the General hang around after this? He did manage to call attention to what the other liberals were wearing. Rubber Duckey Attack Rings propelled by whoopey cushions. What a boneless member of the liberal establishment! Hanging around.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

outtanames999 — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 22:38:14 GMT

McCain's POW experience certainly goes to character building and on the plus side of the equation. Survival is a kind of heroism. But we must remember that McCain got caught. He was captured. Other than dying in battle, it is the ultimate military failure. He was supposed to kill or capture the enemy and instead he got caught. It is only fair then to put that in the negative column on the Hero side. What Hero gets caught?

Valiant? Yes, but only in POW camp. What would would we likely know about his service had he never been caught? How many others served just like him and did not get caught and were never to be heard from again, much less run for president? Doesn't make them any less heroic, or McCain any more heroic than they.

So at the end of the day McCain's service is at best a kind of hygiene factor - something you expect every candidate to have if you are the sort of voter who has that expectation. Obama does not have a service record, but McCain's service likely wouldn't have amounted to much if he hadn't been captured - the far better outcome of his service record.

So we have two Senators, neither of whom have any executive experience. This election will be won based on looks and personality, not qualifications. We will see these two coming closer together every day on the issues, leaving us with black vs. white, young vs. old much more important factors than Democrat vs. Republican or conservative vs. liberal. One mushy moderate vs. another.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

sharenews — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 22:46:21 GMT

Middle East studies in the News

Obama Worked with Terrorist [ref. Rashid Khalidi]

Senator helped fund organization that rejects 'racist' Israel's existence

by Aaron Klein

WorldNetDaily

February 24, 2008

#HYPERLINK "http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=57231"http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=57231

JERUSALEM – The board of a nonprofit organization on which Sen. Barack Obama served as a paid director alongside a confessed domestic terrorist granted funding to a controversial Arab group that mourns the establishment of Israel as a "catastrophe" and supports intense immigration reform, including providing drivers licenses and education to illegal aliens.

The co-founder of the Arab group in question, Columbia University professor Rashid Khalidi, also has held a fundraiser for Obama. Khalidi is a harsh critic of Israel, has made statements supportive of Palestinian terror and reportedly has worked on behalf of the Palestine Liberation Organization while it was involved in anti-Western terrorism and was labeled by the State Department as a terror group.

In 2001, the Woods Fund, a Chicago-based nonprofit that describes itself as a group helping the disadvantaged, provided a $40,000 grant to the Arab American Action Network, or AAAN, for which Khalidi's wife, Mona, serves as president. The Fund provided a second grant to the AAAN for $35,000 in 2002.

Obama was a director of the Woods Fund board from 1999 to Dec. 11, 2002, according to the Fund's website. According to tax filings, Obama received compensation of $6,000 per year for his service in 1999 and 2001.

Obama served on the Wood's Fund board alongside William C. Ayers, a member of the Weathermen terrorist group which sought to overthrow of the U.S. government and took responsibility for bombing the U.S. Capitol in 1971.

Full article: http://www.campus-watch.org/article/id/4821

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

sharenews — Fri, 04 Jul 2008 06:36:31 GMT

Article on Newsweek: Obama says Iraq trip could refine his policy:

Obama struggles to explain how his Iraq trip could refine his plan to remove US troops from war

By NEDRA PICKLER Associated Press Writer | AP

Jul 4, 2008

http://www.newsweek.com/id/139034

AP: Obama struggles to explain how his Iraq trip could refine his plan to remove US troops from war

Sharenews comments on this article:

When Obama was campaigning before and during the early and later Presidential primaries when he was up against all candidates and then later against Hillary, he consistently kept to these specific words:

Once I get into the White House, I will immediately start pulling out 1 to 2 brigades a month with my goal being to have all of our troops out of IRAQ within 16 months.

My questions are:

1a) I have always wondered how Obama could make a steadfast statement like the above statement to consistently promote during the pre-primary time and during the primaries against all candidates and then against Hillary, one on one -- not knowing what the situation would be in Iraq on the day (should he) enter the White House in Jan 2009?

1b) Then I was thinking ???Why wouldn???t Obama have said in his original statement that he would of course be meeting with the Generals leading our effort in Iraq on Day One if elected when campaigning pre- and during the primary days that he would of course want to re-assess the situation (refine his Iraq troop withdrawal plan) when he entered the White House. Instead, it now looks like it has taken McCain???s challenge to get Obama to get to visit Iraq to assess the situation we are in now in IRAQ first-hand, in person to talk to the Generals in charge (which he has now accepted to do this summer, which is great) which is to see if the surge has worked and to what degree; and to get a handle on how it looks moving forward in the near future and into 2009).

Article states: "Obama's Iraq problem undermines the central premise of his candidacy and shows him to be a typical politician."

-------------------------------

sharenews says: Maybe that is all to be said about this article. Im not saying its a huge deal to refine a proposed plan, but when you make such a steadfast tough plan to rip our troops out of IRAQ like Obama was saying he would do up until you are elected as democratic nominee and then start moving (conveniently?) to the center it is of course very questionable that this was part of his plan from Day One, given he did, after all, come out of that Political Machine out of Chicago. I will leave it at that for now.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

sharenews — Fri, 04 Jul 2008 06:43:45 GMT

Obama says Iraq trip could refine his policy:

Obama struggles to explain how his Iraq trip could refine his plan to remove US troops from war

By NEDRA PICKLER Associated Press Writer | AP

Jul 4, 2008

http://www.newsweek.com/id/139034

AP: Obama struggles to explain how his Iraq trip could refine his plan to remove US troops from war

sharenews comments on this article:

Once I get into the White House, I will immediately start pulling out 1 to 2 brigades a month with my goal being to have all of our troops out of IRAQ within 16 months.

My questions are:

Article states: "Obama's Iraq problem undermines the central premise of his candidacy and shows him to be a typical politician."

-------------------------------

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

HDavidson — Fri, 04 Jul 2008 07:23:55 GMT

Hey Schlang, maybe if you were shot down over that river in Egypt, you and McCain could be together...in de nile...lol

McCain was shot down after crashing 5 other fighters, he sucked as a pilot, he did not hit pavement, he landed in a lake, where they later errected a monument to the "song bird". As much as I dislike anything BUSH, I have more than a slight feeling there was a difference in teh goings on...

I wonder if Bush sr. would ahve done 32 propaganda films if he was caught also...or would he ahve just had his records sealed...

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

HolyRoller — Sat, 05 Jul 2008 02:25:18 GMT

ALL OBAMAMOHAMMED'S....want a sneak preview of the "larry sinclair ads" coming out this week??? You can hear for yourself.

..................... http://www.americashopefoundation.com .....................................

WARNING...WARNING....WARNING.....Does not mix well with Kool-Aide.

NOBAMA!!!

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

thehappyamerican — Sat, 05 Jul 2008 11:16:46 GMT

The Dems run an on-going discrimination campaign against Christians,Law Enforcement, Achievers, Gun Owners and MILITARY EXPERTS. each is suposed to come off as "informed" or some trump cart.

Frankly, it is why the DNC has a very low approval in the US congress which it controls!

Americans do not like Discrimination Campaigns! The Dems run theirs agaist too many Americans--and people who make the Country work!

Obama can not divorce himself from his own party. And the closer to November we get the more the DNC is going to be a chain around Obamas' leg!The DNC is late-retarded- in getting it's public approval up or even in an upward trend. Too much contempt for too many Americans!

Democrats should give tolerence and mutual respect a chance! We should all be so lucky to have such friends who will not abandon you while torture was frequent, and the friend could just leave you... but stayed.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

sharenews — Sat, 05 Jul 2008 21:07:27 GMT

http://www.southparkstudios.com/clips/104400/

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

sharenews — Sat, 05 Jul 2008 23:19:29 GMT

I wonder where Obama's camp put the porta-potties in Butte Montana when Obama participated in a parade and spoke to all the Buttonians on the patriotic Fourth of July?

I say this cuz the video link below will show you the ridiculous place the Porta-Potties were placed for an Obama event that was setup for an Oregon Memorial Day ralley for those of you who didnt catch it first time around as it was barely on the radar in the media when it happened (surprise, surprise):

http://www.kptv.com/video/16412197/index.html

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Driver of wagons — Sun, 06 Jul 2008 01:22:47 GMT

When is the Repugnant party going to get over their Cr@pper fetish They do interns in the Cr@pper, They do it with Strangers in Airport Crappers and their most important, number one thing that they get out of a Barack Obama Speech is the placement of the Cr@ppers. Well I guess they need to be prepared because like the Repugnants say one can never be to sure when opportunity comes a knocking (On the Cr@pper stall!)

Ha Ha Ha Ho Ho Ho He He He

Increase your A___ PAIN with your vote for McCain... he he he

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

sharenews — Sun, 06 Jul 2008 03:57:34 GMT

FROM THE GALLUP POLLING:

80% OF AMERICANS SEE MCCAIN AS CAPABLE OF HANDLING THE RESPONSIBILITIES OF COMMANDER IN CHIEF:

July 3, 2008

Nearly All Americans Consider Military Service PATRIOTIC

Symbolic gestures valued more highly by older Americans and the less educated

by Lymari Morales

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Nearly two-thirds of Americans (62%) say serving in the U.S. military reveals "a great deal" about one's patriotism, ranking it second only to voting in elections among six items rated in a recent USA Today/Gallup poll. More than half of Americans (53%) say the same about reciting the pledge of allegiance, and far fewer about wearing an American flag pin.

Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama spent much of this Independence Day week trying to assure voters of his patriotism, having been faulted during the Democratic primary season for at times not wearing an American flag pin, and for not placing his hand over his heart during the national anthem on at least one occasion. Obama's speech on Monday, entitled "The America We Love," included praise for Republican rival John McCain's service to his country in Vietnam, in response to retired Gen. Wesley Clark's statement that McCain's experience as a Navy pilot and prisoner of war does not necessarily qualify him to be commander in chief.

McCain's service in Vietnam is generally considered an advantage in this wartime election against Obama, who has never served in the military, and a key reason why:

80% OF AMERICANS SEE MCCAIN AS CAPABLE OF HANDLING THE RESPONSIBILITIES OF COMMANDER IN CHIEF:

The Gallup data reveal that Americans do in fact consider military service in general to be a sign of patriotism. While Republicans are among the most likely of all groups to say serving in the military reveals a great deal about one's patriotism, more than half of both Democrats and independents agree. Republicans also tend to place more value on saying the pledge of allegiance and wearing an American flag pin, while independents align more closely with Democrats, who are generally less likely to place a high value on each action.

source: http://www.gallup.com/poll/108646/Nearly-All-Americans-Consider-Military-Service-Patriotic.aspx

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

sharenews — Sun, 06 Jul 2008 05:57:19 GMT

What I dont get is why did it take prodding by McCain to get Obama to go over to Iraq prior to the democ. convention this summer to see what is going on over there in the war on terrorism? Which of course planning ahead to go there riggered Obama to downplay his absolute steadfast of 16 month pullout possibly being affected depending on what he now finds when he goes to check out Iraq to meet with the generals, leaders this summer. Obama should have already been tooting that he was going to do that right along without McCain having to challenge him about doing it. Does make me question Obamas judgement on that.

http://www.thepeninsulaqatar.com/Display_news.asp?section=World_News&subsection=Americas&month=June2008&file=World_News200806291438.xml

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

eddiewhere — Sun, 06 Jul 2008 19:00:15 GMT

WHAT IS McCAIN's MESSAGE. IS HIS MESSAGE THE SAME AS THE CURRENT PRESIDENT.

IF McCAIN's MESSAGE AND AGENDA are DIFFERENT THEN WHAT ARE THE DIFFERENCES.

I THINK THE REPUBLICAN BASE IS NOT REALLY SURE WHAT McCAIN's MESSAGE IS EITHER.

McCAIN is going to lose four states that traditionally have been REPBULICAN strongholds.

OBAMA HAS A MESSAGE and McCAIN HAS NONE.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

eddiewhere — Sun, 06 Jul 2008 19:00:18 GMT

WHAT IS McCAIN's MESSAGE. IS HIS MESSAGE THE SAME AS THE CURRENT PRESIDENT.

IF McCAIN's MESSAGE AND AGENDA are DIFFERENT THEN WHAT ARE THE DIFFERENCES.

I THINK THE REPUBLICAN BASE IS NOT REALLY SURE WHAT McCAIN's MESSAGE IS EITHER.

McCAIN is going to lose four states that traditionally have been REPBULICAN strongholds.

OBAMA HAS A MESSAGE and McCAIN HAS NONE.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

eddiewhere — Sun, 06 Jul 2008 19:41:11 GMT

Centrisim, Triangualation. Anyone who wants to be President has to understand these concepts. We will pull out of Iraq when OBAMA takes the Presidency. However, every President has to listen to those "in charge" of the war before any Military decisions are made. THOSE IN CHARGE OF THE WAR HAve already started to build A HUNDRED YEAR FOUNDATION in IRAQ. McCAIN INTENDS TO FINISH THE JOB.

THOSE IN CHARGE OF THE WAR HAVE ECONOMIC INTERESTS IN IRAQ. THEY WILL MAKE IT VERY DIFFICULT FOR THE NEXT PRESIDENT TO PULL OUR TROOPS OUT.

OBAMA IS ALREADY ACTING LIKE AN EXPERIENCED PRESIDENT.

People need to understand a UNIVERSAL LAW

NOTHING IS CONSTANT

THINGS ARE ALWAYS CHANGING. IT IS PART OF HUMAN EVOLUTION.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

eddiewhere — Sun, 06 Jul 2008 19:41:18 GMT

THOSE IN CHARGE OF THE WAR HAVE ECONOMIC INTERESTS IN IRAQ. THEY WILL MAKE IT VERY DIFFICULT FOR THE NEXT PRESIDENT TO PULL OUR TROOPS OUT.

OBAMA IS ALREADY ACTING LIKE AN EXPERIENCED PRESIDENT.

People need to understand a UNIVERSAL LAW

NOTHING IS CONSTANT

THINGS ARE ALWAYS CHANGING. IT IS PART OF HUMAN EVOLUTION.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

eddiewhere — Sun, 06 Jul 2008 19:41:18 GMT

THOSE IN CHARGE OF THE WAR HAVE ECONOMIC INTERESTS IN IRAQ. THEY WILL MAKE IT VERY DIFFICULT FOR THE NEXT PRESIDENT TO PULL OUR TROOPS OUT.

OBAMA IS ALREADY ACTING LIKE AN EXPERIENCED PRESIDENT.

People need to understand a UNIVERSAL LAW

NOTHING IS CONSTANT

THINGS ARE ALWAYS CHANGING. IT IS PART OF HUMAN EVOLUTION.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

eddiewhere — Sun, 06 Jul 2008 19:41:18 GMT

THOSE IN CHARGE OF THE WAR HAVE ECONOMIC INTERESTS IN IRAQ. THEY WILL MAKE IT VERY DIFFICULT FOR THE NEXT PRESIDENT TO PULL OUR TROOPS OUT.

OBAMA IS ALREADY ACTING LIKE AN EXPERIENCED PRESIDENT.

People need to understand a UNIVERSAL LAW

NOTHING IS CONSTANT

THINGS ARE ALWAYS CHANGING. IT IS PART OF HUMAN EVOLUTION.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

eddiewhere — Sun, 06 Jul 2008 19:41:24 GMT

THOSE IN CHARGE OF THE WAR HAVE ECONOMIC INTERESTS IN IRAQ. THEY WILL MAKE IT VERY DIFFICULT FOR THE NEXT PRESIDENT TO PULL OUR TROOPS OUT.

OBAMA IS ALREADY ACTING LIKE AN EXPERIENCED PRESIDENT.

People need to understand a UNIVERSAL LAW

NOTHING IS CONSTANT

THINGS ARE ALWAYS CHANGING. IT IS PART OF HUMAN EVOLUTION.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

eddiewhere — Sun, 06 Jul 2008 19:41:25 GMT

THOSE IN CHARGE OF THE WAR HAVE ECONOMIC INTERESTS IN IRAQ. THEY WILL MAKE IT VERY DIFFICULT FOR THE NEXT PRESIDENT TO PULL OUR TROOPS OUT.

OBAMA IS ALREADY ACTING LIKE AN EXPERIENCED PRESIDENT.

People need to understand a UNIVERSAL LAW

NOTHING IS CONSTANT

THINGS ARE ALWAYS CHANGING. IT IS PART OF HUMAN EVOLUTION.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

eddiewhere — Sun, 06 Jul 2008 19:41:31 GMT

THOSE IN CHARGE OF THE WAR HAVE ECONOMIC INTERESTS IN IRAQ. THEY WILL MAKE IT VERY DIFFICULT FOR THE NEXT PRESIDENT TO PULL OUR TROOPS OUT.

OBAMA IS ALREADY ACTING LIKE AN EXPERIENCED PRESIDENT.

People need to understand a UNIVERSAL LAW

NOTHING IS CONSTANT

THINGS ARE ALWAYS CHANGING. IT IS PART OF HUMAN EVOLUTION.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

eddiewhere — Sun, 06 Jul 2008 19:41:31 GMT

THOSE IN CHARGE OF THE WAR HAVE ECONOMIC INTERESTS IN IRAQ. THEY WILL MAKE IT VERY DIFFICULT FOR THE NEXT PRESIDENT TO PULL OUR TROOPS OUT.

OBAMA IS ALREADY ACTING LIKE AN EXPERIENCED PRESIDENT.

People need to understand a UNIVERSAL LAW

NOTHING IS CONSTANT

THINGS ARE ALWAYS CHANGING. IT IS PART OF HUMAN EVOLUTION.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

eddiewhere — Sun, 06 Jul 2008 19:44:18 GMT

THOSE IN CHARGE OF THE WAR HAVE ECONOMIC INTERESTS IN IRAQ. THEY WILL MAKE IT VERY DIFFICULT FOR THE NEXT PRESIDENT TO PULL OUR TROOPS OUT.

OBAMA IS ALREADY ACTING LIKE AN EXPERIENCED PRESIDENT.

People need to understand a UNIVERSAL LAW

NOTHING IS CONSTANT

THINGS ARE ALWAYS CHANGING. IT IS PART OF HUMAN EVOLUTION.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

DavidCA — Sun, 06 Jul 2008 19:57:45 GMT

Mr. Romano, did you actually watch the interview or read the transcript you're writing about? If so, then a better topic would be that an experienced political reporter like Bob Schieffer suggests that being shot down IS a qualification to be president (see following). Fortunately, Mr. Clark corrects his mistaken understanding of Article II of the US Constitution. Mr. Clark's words, which you find dismissive, are actually an accurate recapitulation of Mr. Schieffer's premise.

SCHIEFFER: I have to say, Barack Obama has not ... ridden in a fighter plane and gotten shot down. I mean --

CLARK: Well, I don't think riding in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to be president.

SCHIEFFER: Really?

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Wisconsin Voter — Sun, 06 Jul 2008 20:57:59 GMT

Clark spoke the truth, something this reporter does not seem to be able to do.

I am so tired of hearing about McWar's service at the expense of discussing McWar's failing issues that I will dismiss McWar's service when it comes to being President!

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

sharenews — Sun, 06 Jul 2008 21:56:49 GMT

JOHN MCCAIN, COMMANDER IN CHIEF - The perception is there no matter what people think.

FROM THE GALLUP POLLING:

80% OF AMERICANS SEE MCCAIN AS CAPABLE OF HANDLING THE RESPONSIBILITIES OF COMMANDER IN CHIEF:

July 3, 2008

Nearly All Americans Consider Military Service PATRIOTIC

Symbolic gestures valued more highly by older Americans and the less educated

by Lymari Morales

McCain's service in Vietnam is generally considered an advantage in this wartime election against Obama, who has never served in the military, and a key reason why:

80% OF AMERICANS SEE MCCAIN AS CAPABLE OF HANDLING THE RESPONSIBILITIES OF COMMANDER IN CHIEF:

source: http://www.gallup.com/poll/108646/Nearly-All-Americans-Consider-Military-Service-Patriotic.aspx

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

sharenews — Sun, 06 Jul 2008 21:56:57 GMT

JOHN MCCAIN, COMMANDER IN CHIEF - The perception is there no matter what people think.

FROM THE GALLUP POLLING:

80% OF AMERICANS SEE MCCAIN AS CAPABLE OF HANDLING THE RESPONSIBILITIES OF COMMANDER IN CHIEF:

July 3, 2008

Nearly All Americans Consider Military Service PATRIOTIC

Symbolic gestures valued more highly by older Americans and the less educated

by Lymari Morales

McCain's service in Vietnam is generally considered an advantage in this wartime election against Obama, who has never served in the military, and a key reason why:

80% OF AMERICANS SEE MCCAIN AS CAPABLE OF HANDLING THE RESPONSIBILITIES OF COMMANDER IN CHIEF:

source: http://www.gallup.com/poll/108646/Nearly-All-Americans-Consider-Military-Service-Patriotic.aspx

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

sharenews — Sun, 06 Jul 2008 22:00:38 GMT

http://www.thepeninsulaqatar.com/Display_news.asp?section=World_News&subsection=Americas&month=June2008&file=World_News200806291438

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Driver of wagons — Sun, 06 Jul 2008 22:47:42 GMT

It is a battle against terrorist not a war on terrorism and we are losing because we are fighting the wrong people in the wrong place and as a result of what we are not doing the terrorist keep getting stronger away from the battle out of harms way. Now we are stuck and no body has a clue how to get out of this mess.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Driver of wagons — Sun, 06 Jul 2008 22:59:10 GMT

Anybody what to see how the paranoid lunatic fringe lives check this out it is good for a laugh or two.

http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/05/17/obama-boys-lets-hire-400-bloggers-to-make-nicey-with-those-

Yeah like some people really need to get over themselves.

Ha Ha ha Ho Ho Ho He He He

okay with paranoia and that never ending PAIN seal it with your vote for McCain

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Wisconsin Voter — Mon, 07 Jul 2008 05:18:06 GMT

Hey Driver you realize that you are just reposting info from Fixed (Fox) News right? You stupid fool, hey I'll give a terrorist fist bump to anyone that tells McWar where he can stick his flag pin!

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Driver of wagons — Mon, 07 Jul 2008 17:36:05 GMT

hey NewsWeak You can let this one die you have exposed Main Stream Media for the Corporate Repugnant Sheep they most assuredly are. And for that matter you can remove this uninformed Andrew Romano (Email | Bio) for so humorously making a mockery your publication and hire somebody who has an independent mind frame to write OP Eds.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

sharenews — Mon, 07 Jul 2008 20:50:21 GMT

New Pro-Hillary website launched today. Sign the pledge to get her name on the ballot for nomination.

Here is the new site. Check it out: http://www.together4us.com/

THE PLEDGE OF TOGETHERNESS: SPREAD THE WORD!

We stand together with her 18 million voters in pursuit of all of the following:

Bring us together by honoring Hillary Clinton and her supporters at the Democratic National Convention in Denver by:

Placing her name into nomination (following traditional protocol)

Ensuring a roll-call vote

Inviting her to speak, during prime-time, on August 26th, the 88th anniversary of Women's Suffrage

Bring us together by adoption of policies on the Platform Committee that Hillary Clinton has championed.

Bring us together through reform of the primary and caucus system to reflect the basic principle of one person - one vote.

Bring us together through outspoken denunciation of all gender bias, racism and other forms of discrimination.

Bring us together by making a concerted effort to retire her campaign debt.

We are being asked to embrace Party Unity without the fair representation of Hillary Clinton and her 18 million voters. Party Unity requires bilateral action. We ask Barack Obama and the DNC to respond.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

HolyRoller — Tue, 08 Jul 2008 02:18:29 GMT

Appears Hussein is a man of character, after all. I just picked up this thank you letter due to be released across the country, to all his supporters. I apologize for all my negative comments. He may well be the Messiah...........

My fellow Americans:

As your future President I want to thank my supporters, for your mindless support of me, despite my complete lack of any legislative achievement, my pastor's relations with Louis Farrakhan and Libyan dictator Moamar Quadafi, or my blatantly leftist voting record while I present myself as some sort of bi-partisan agent of change.

I also like how my supporters claim my youthful drug use and criminal behavior somehow qualifies me for the Presidency after 8 years of claiming Bush's youthful drinking disqualifies him. Your hypocrisy is a beacon of hope shining over a sea of political posing.

I would also like to thank the Kennedy's for coming out in support of me. There's a lot of glamour behind the Kennedy name, even though JFK started the Vietnam War, his brother Robert illegally wiretapped Martin Luther King, Jr. and Teddy killed a female employee with whom he was having an extra marital affair and who was pregnant with his child. And I'm not going anywhere near the cousins, both literally and figuratively.

And I'd like to thank Oprah Winfrey for her support. Her love of meaningless empty platitudes will be the force that propels me to the White House.

Americans should vote for me, not because of my lack of experience or achievement, but because I make people feel good.

Voting for me causes some white folk to feel relieved of their imagined, racist guilt. I say things that sound meaningful, but don't really mean anything because Americans are tired of things having meaning. If things have meaning, then that means you have to think about them.

Americans are tired of thinking. It's time to shut down the brain and open up the heart. So when you go to vote, remember don't think, just do. And do it for me.

Thank You.

Barack Hussein Obama,

NOBAMA!!!

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Wisconsin Voter — Tue, 08 Jul 2008 02:32:57 GMT

HollyRoller

What's the problem, is it just to hard to talk about McWar's good points. You are a PERFECT example of what it takes to be a republican.

Do we even need to go into all the republican fear mongering used in this campaign and over the last 8 years?

I like that you are talking about character, yet you have none. In your own post you use fear by using Hussein meant to scare the stupid into thinking that Obama is Muslim and to try and connect him to terrorist.

I call McCain McWar to remind people that with McCain/McWar we are set to stay in a war with a country that never attacked us, a war that has made the world less safe for Americans.

You and people like you are the bottom of the bucket and my reward for not being like you is that I do not have to live your life.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

HDavidson — Tue, 08 Jul 2008 04:04:53 GMT

Hey CornHolyO I'll let them know here also...k sweetie?

Awe what a good little sheep. you hit just about every one of the Sean Hannity/FOXpublican talking points that there has been, so cudos to you.

UNFORTUNATELY, as usual you are FULL OF RACIST SH!T! Nobody cares about Rev Wright, unless you just want to again boost his numbers and make him stronger, like each time it came up in the primaries. Also Only about 13% of voters still think he's Muslim, 13% why does that sound familuar? Oh yeah that is the combined number of people from Wva And Kn who said they would not vote for him because he's BLACK, not Muslim, BLACK.

You see I have figured out the whole "Muslim" joke. I refuse to believe that 43 million people can be that STUPID, when it is clear that he is NOT and NEVER has been a Muslim. He is however BLACK and always has been (at least half). It's not ok, or socially acceptable to hate himm for being "Black" you can't just come out and call him the "N" word, not anymore. BUT, you can hate him if you "believe" he's Muslim, right now that is acceptable socailly, now only by about 28% of the population, but it's easier to claim that's why YOU hate him and get away with it then to just say..."I hate that "N" word"...and it makes you angry that you can't just come out and say it, you think it should be your right, and it is, you're just a coward, so you say "Muslim" instead of "N" word. Shame on you RACIST.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

HDavidson — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 01:59:27 GMT

Hey Andrew, get with the program. use the same format as everybody else here

so words don't get clipped....mmmmkay, we get it you like to show your report over and over

Its annoying....PLease fix it.

re: The Perils of Dismissing McCain's Military Service

Ronprill — Thu, 24 Jul 2008 09:51:48 GMT

Being retired military I agree with General Clark being shot down in wartime, getting captured, then saying he refused to let them release him from the pow camp. this just showes how McCain lies, first you don"t get shot down, second you try to avoid capture, third you try to escape every chance you get. according to military rule, If you did not follow the rules and try to escape you are subject to a courtmartial. so if what you wrote is true then McCain is still subject to a trail By courtmartial, instead of being a hero he now becomes a bum who should be exposed for what he really did. I believe if his father had not been in high rank in service John McCain would be a bum today