Smoking out McCain

[jtkratzer]

"Our greatness," he wrote in "Worth the Fighting For," "depends upon our patriotism, and our patriotism is hardly encouraged when we cannot take pride in the highest public institutions."

I agree, how can a country be effective around the world in foreign policy or even at home with domestic policy if the people don't support the government?

Why was Nazi Germany so effective for the first 10 years or so? They had almost complete support of the people...sure, they got it by removing anyone who didn't support it, but the fact remains, when you have a government who has the support of a patriotic citizenship, the country will do well at whatever it is attempting to do...Nazi Germany would have done great things if they were so bent on world domination and the destruction of the Jews.

[jtkratzer]

If his issues line up with yours, and if you're not overly concerned by an activist federal government, McCain can be a great and sympathetic ally. But chances are he will eventually see a grave national threat in what you consider harmless, or he'll prescribe a remedy that you consider unconscionable. Nowhere is that more evident than in his ideas about the Iraq war.

Speculation and opinion. Inappropriate for the "news" to be "reporting." This is the kind of forecasting I get on the Weather Channel.

[jtkratzer]

McCain is more inclined to start wars and increase troop levels than George W. Bush or Bill Clinton.

Speculation. Do I need to repeat myself? This is the garbage you post Etta that I get tired of reading because it's not the newspapers' jobs to speculate and give an opinion on what they think is the political forecast of a candidate they don't support.


Truth is he's more likely to have the balls to finish a war.

[SpringfieldXD.40]

Originally Posted by ArmyGuy45

I.. ah.. im not to sure about this..
but.. ah... i think your trying to tell me something

C'mon, man...can you honestly say that you are "unsure" as to who is the best of the three? Obama, Clinton, or McCain?

[jtkratzer]

The price of all this war-making, in money and manpower, would be staggering; it's hard to imagine without a draft (McCain has long been a fan of mandatory national service, at the least). But the costs to his political ambitions may even be greater. The nation is in no mood for the war we've got now, let alone a doubling-down on Iraq and ramped-up unilateralist tough talk in the Middle East. The trend lines of public opinion on these counts are not pointing in McCain's direction.

Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. Wrong.



This country is in no mood for a war with no plan or strategy...when we're winning the war and progress is being made, the people rally behind it. Why do you think the liberals are constantly changing their angle of attack on the war in Iraq? Because people don't buy into it. They bitched about the cost...well, it's only 1% GDP over the course of the 5 years we've been there. They bitch about the casualties, well, it's less than 1/9th of Vietnam and less than the 6-figure number in WW2. They say we're not winning, but the surge is accomplishing much. They say it's a religious bloodbath civil war, but when you talk to the troops on the ground, that's not what you're hearing from the troops who are actually there. There is no plan for the liberals on how to end the war other than to protest by any means possible, truth or fiction, against any and all policy that is in favor of finishing the job.


Americans want victory, give us a plan/strategy that's working and we will support it.

[ArmyGuy45]

Originally Posted by SpringfieldXD.40

C'mon, man...can you honestly say that you are "unsure" as to who is the best of the three? Obama, Clinton, or McCain?

I voted Huck but will be voting McCain

[jtkratzer]

One of the many charming confessions in "Worth the Fighting For" is McCain's complaint that the man he replaced in the Senate — Republican icon Barry Goldwater — was "never as affectionate as I would have liked." Small wonder.

WTF?

Goldwater, a man who seemed to emanate from Arizona's dust, was the paragon of limited government, believing to his core that the feds shouldn't tell you how to run a business or whom you can sleep with. McCain, on the other hand, is a third-generation D.C. insider who carpetbagged his way into office, believing to his core that "national pride will not survive the people's contempt for government."

WTF do you call Clinton and Obama...Clinton is where she is because she was the president's wife...otherwise, she's just a female junior senator from NY.

Same with Obama, he's a black man with a great speaking ability...just a junior senator from IL.

Where is your "independent and objective" review of these candidates, you clown?

[/quote]On Nov. 7, those conflicting worldviews collided when Arizonans voted on whether to outlaw gay marriage. McCain campaigned in favor of the ban, in the name of "preserving the sanctity" of heterosexual unions. His exhortations went down to surprising defeat. Not, one suspects, for the last time.[/quote]

So why not "report" on everyone who voted in favor of it? There is a senator at the state level in PA who wants to add an amendment to the state constitution to ban gay marriage. Where is your article on that slappy?

[SpringfieldXD.40]

Originally Posted by ArmyGuy45

I voted Huck but will be voting McCain

Right on, man.....he certainly wasn't my first choice either But...like I said....he is really all we have

[jtkratzer]

Originally Posted by ArmyGuy45

I voted Huck but will be voting McCain

You're in the spot a lot of people are in....maybe McCain wasn't your first choice, but he's certainly in a different league than the others when it comes to being a red-blooded lover of the American country. The other two want to rewrite history and change the American Revolution to something more like the Marxist Revolution.

Read the Communist Manifesto and get back to me after you're mouth hangs open for a week over how Obama and Clinton are getting their campaign direction and political views from this book as if it's a how-to manual or textbook on running a country.

[jtkratzer]

All I have to say is I'm tired of people posting unsubstantiated garbage on this site from liberal "news" outlets who read their crap and accept it as truth. They post it here in either ignorance of how the liberal media works or simply to stir the pot. We see this crap on a weekly, if not daily basis.

I say that because this stuff isn't being posted with the intent of, "Hey everyone, look at what these meatheads are writing and trying to pass of as legitimate journalism...everyone come and laugh."

They're being posted as truth and it's ludicrous to read this stuff...people are brainwashed by this crap on a daily basis...it's not even objective, it's propaganda. It's simply another avenue for the liberals to get their message out by either building up the Democratic party and it's potential nominees or it's to tear down the Republican party because we already have our man picked as the nominee and they know they are in trouble with how long this race is happening. The Democratic candidates cannot take time to combat John McCain yet because they have to be focused on the other Dem. to get the nomination first, so they rely on the liberal media to do their job for them and slowly, but calculatingly subvert the population.

If you can't see that happening, you're either clueless to the political world and how it works in this country, or you just don't get it.