Who Do You Choose In November?

[Euryleia]

McCain on the other hand does and has made many tough choices throuout his long career in the senate and as a former Admiral in charge of the entire Pacific Fleet in the Navy where our very wellfare as a nation was allready held in his hands on numerous occasions (his military credentials are not soley contained within his time as a POW). His track reccord in a leadership role is well established.

Big clarification here. The highest naval rank John McCain achieved was Captain, and that was only through the influence of his family. He was never in charge in the Pacific or any other fleet. In fact, his naval career was almost over before it started but, like Bush, he had the influence of his famous father and grandfather (both Admirals) to keep him from washing out and to give him chances to beyond what other officers received.

For example, he graduated fifth from the bottom of his class from the Naval Academy in Annapolis and, through family connections, moved into flight school where he crashed several planes and did more partying than actual flight instruction. Yes, we all know he paid a terrible price for the final crash by spending horrific years as a prisoner of war. Worse for the nation, though, is that he fantasizes that a sure victory in Vietnam could have been achieved with just a little more bombing and just a little more will to win at home. This is very scary considering the two wars that Bush already has us fighting.

And talk about his qualifications in politics, exactly what were his achievements there? He had the initial election as a US Representative bought for him by his wealthy, new father-in-law (considering that he hadn't even lived a day in Arizona until the election). There is no real record of his doing anything during his two terms there before running for the Senate seat vacated by Barry Goldwater.

And just what has he managed to do while a Senator? His campaign finance law failed to significantly reduce the role of money in politics. He failed to get a big tobacco bill through the Senate. He's failed to change the way Congress spends money; his bill to give the president a line-item veto was declared unconstitutional, and the system of pork and earmarks continues unabated. He even failed to reform the immigration system.

Every senator who runs for president misses votes back in Washington, but between the beginning of 2005 and mid-2007, no senator missed more roll-call votes than McCain did, except Tim Johnson, who was recovering from a near-fatal brain aneurysm. What does that say about his dedication to the job he already has? We've already had a president in Bush who has taken more vacation time than any other in history. Do we need another?

Further, his womanizing is worse than Bill Clinton's and is the one constant through his history at the Naval Academy, flight school, the deployments and after his return from Vietnam. Further, his treatment of his disabled first wife is not the thing you would expect from someone who had even an ounce of integrity.

McCain is not the paragon he wants us to believe he is. He is shallow and self serving and not fit to be Commander in Chief.

[Thorne]

...he fantasizes that a sure victory in Vietnam could have been achieved with just a little more bombing and just a little more will to win at home.

Actually, he's probably right about that. The North Vietnamese government was on the verge of suing for peace when the US Government caved into anti-war protesters and stopped the bombing of North Vietnamese cities.

Understand, that doesn't mean we were right to be in Vietnam in the first place (we weren't) nor does it mean we are right to be in Iraq and Afghanistan now (we probably shouldn't be). What it means is that the American people need to support their military much more actively than they are now, and be more careful of who they put in power.

Personally, I don't give a rip which party gets the presidency. I don't believe it's going to make all that much difference one way or the other. It's far more critical for us to elect Senators and Congressmen who are honest and capable. We don't seem to be able to do that.

[mkemse]

Actually, he's probably right about that. The North Vietnamese government was on the verge of suing for peace when the US Government caved into anti-war protesters and stopped the bombing of North Vietnamese cities.

Understand, that doesn't mean we were right to be in Vietnam in the first place (we weren't) nor does it mean we are right to be in Iraq and Afghanistan now (we probably shouldn't be). What it means is that the American people need to support their military much more actively than they are now, and be more careful of who they put in power.

Personally, I don't give a rip which party gets the presidency. I don't believe it's going to make all that much difference one way or the other. It's far more critical for us to elect Senators and Congressmen who are honest and capable. We don't seem to be able to do that.

I agree with 99% of what you said except about Afganistan, we need to be there, the Talibn and Bin Laden are hiding somewhere near their in the Tora Bora Mountainds and they are the one responsible for 911, I beileve we invaded Iraw because Bush saw his failure in even locating Bin Laden so he needed to change the thinkin process of the American People.
I also do not unstand how we have been unable to locate Bin Laden, if he is in Pakistan whivh many have suggested, how do we miss a Man who i wel over 6 feet tall, long grying beard ect, he wols stick out like a sore thumb

I agree we have no reason to be in Iraq(But Bush never needs any valid or offers and valid reason for anything he does or does not sdo) bu we do need to track Binladen down and distroy the Taliban