<p>
You know, I am discovering that I currently do not have proper control to come up with any response to this other than to repeat it and hope someone with greater skill than I can put into words what I feel about that statement and everything I read into it.</p>
<p>DukeEgr-
The complete quote was
While not the best choice of analogies, I took this line to mean that we haven’t lost a serviceman in South Korea to anything combat-related in a long time.</p>
<p>Are you saying that armed conflict (meaning, war) is still being waged between North and South Korea? </p>
<p>Btw, I was being somewhat tongue-in-cheek. There are any number of ways American military personnel can die while on active duty in a foreign land. But in the case of Germany, Italy, England, or Korea, armed conflict against an enemy army are not among them.</p>
<p>I apologize if I offended you with my flip comment, DukeEgr93.</p>
<p>Btw, I am a veteran myself—Navy—, and having been one myself, have utmost respect for our men and women in uniform. But I also was acquainted with some pretty heavy drinkers, and while performing watch duty, encountered more than a few staggering out of the EClub on a Friday or Saturday night;).</p>
<p>Poetsheart-
Your analogy reminded me of one I heard in grad school. It was in bad taste, but it made it’s point. (warning: bad taste analogy to follow-- skip it if you don’t want to be offended). What was said was that the only way a suicidal patient could die from valium would be by getting run over by a truck transporting it. Yes, it was a crass way of teaching us that few patients can die from a purposeful overdose of diazepam, but it made the point.</p>
<p>Colin Powell knew that he was bending the truth or whatever you want to call it. I know he was reluctant, but in the end he chose to go along with Cheney and Bush - I find that cowardly. I liked Colin Powell until that moment - I remember it like it was yesterday, because my husband, a lifelong Democrat who has followed politics since he was five, was swayed by Colin Powell and thought they must have really found something in Iraq. I was not swayed. </p>
<p>Vicariousparent,
Honestly, I don’t understand how anyone that calls themself an independent could give any consideration to the Republican party in its present state and in light of the past eight years. I could completely understand why you might have voted for Bush in 2000 but not in 2004. I think a lot of Republicans are calling themselves independents so they can redeem themselves for voting for Bush a second time. If Bush was not so widely disliked I don’t think we would see so many people so eager to call themselves independents. I liked McCain when he ran against Bush, but he’s not the leader he used to be - too old and out of touch and he’s a Republican. He’s a good man, a courageous man, but no longer presidential. </p>
<p>Mercymom,
Why was it so hard to decide between Kerry and Bush?</p>
<p>My 79 year old grandfather who really is a typical older white person in terms of racial views and who hadnt voted Democrat for a few decades (think well before Jimmy Carter, when the Democrats were the real conservatives) said he was considering Obama. But after the pastor’s comments, he’s trying to decide between Hillary and McCain (He hates the Iraq war is the reason for abandoning the GOP at all).</p>
<p>I really dont see how Obama can beat McCain now, this has just alienated way too many independents.</p>
<p>The Koreas are still technically at war. There’s no peace treaty. Why is the US still in Germany?</p>
<p>If a pastor’s words alienated a voter from voting for Obama, then I don’t think the tie was strong to begin with. Obama gave an excellent speech that dealt with this blown out of proportion conflict. Where was or is the outrage at the Bush administration and all of the questionable, probably illegal and unconstitutional stuff they’ve pulled? Valerie Plame comes to mind - a real situation with real consequences, not just some pastor’s impassioned and emotional speech.</p>
<p>
Thank you PH for attempting to set the record straight. However, I think people who seize on this 100-year war sound bite aren’t really looking to be objective. They have already made up their minds and are just rationalizing at this point.</p>
<p>It’s the same thing with the “not understanding economics” bite - can anyone seriously claim that Obama, with his lawyer background and a few years in the Senate, has a better understanding of the US economy than someone who has been dealing with it for decades? Sure people will attempt to club McCain over the head with this, but it really does nothing more than reflect on the intelligence of the person making the charge.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Did you just say that your old grandpa was in some way a “typical white person”? OMG, the shame of it! You do realize that you committed “an Obama” don’t you? Someone correct me if I’m wrong, but hasn’t he been accused of having said the same thing about his old grandma?:eek:</p>
<p>“If taxation should be the last resort, what should come first?”</p>
<p>I’ve made my position clear on this and even on this thread. Spend carefully and send most discretionary spending to the states. It’s specifically federal taxation that we’re talking about here. Of course there have to be taxes, but the mindset that the money is collective and should only grudgingly be returned to its earners makes me nuts.</p>
<p>lizschup: I voted for Kerry. I think of myself as more sympathetic to the Democratic party today precisely because at this point in time that is the party where centrists have the power and because the Republican party has been hijacked by the right wing. I want to help the Republican left wing (yes, McCain is a left winger among the Republicans) gain control of the GOP. McCain even considered switching parties to become a Democrat a few years ago. I may just vote for him, especially if Clinton is the Democratic nominee. Not because I dislike Clinton, but because I like McCain more, and also because I find Clinton to be too much of a partisan. </p>
<p>Independents are people who like certain aspects of each party but don’t like the whole party platform. We are not going to be ‘loyal’ to one side or the other. Get used to us. There are more and more of us around. </p>
<p>Personally, I think the executive branch should not be controlled by a “party”. We should have more independents as Mayors, Governors and eventually, Presidents.</p>
<p>"Personally, I think the executive branch should not be controlled by a “party”. We should have more independents as Mayors, "</p>
<p>We have an independent Mayor here. In some cases, independent translates to “egomaniacal dictator” as here. But I do get your point and I think partisanship for partisanship’s sake is very damaging. I’d like to see my party lean left on some things, like gay marriage, but hard right on others like immigration. Although I’m encouraged by the fact that individual states are taking action on immigration, so that’s a good thing. I’m not in love with McCain and I’m sure he’s not in love with my party. I revile Hillary Clinton. But I can see some good in Obama, although I want to be clear that I won’t be voting for him, and if he is elected, well then, my party can’t always win, right? Stuck with Pelosi and Reid, I don’t think any democratic president will have much success, but that’s just my partisanship talking, so call me a hypocrite.</p>
<p>vp - I like what you’ve been saying about McCain pulling the Republican Party toward the center. I consider myself a Conservative, but I don’t like it when the parties get too extremist (this is one reason why I just can’t vote for Obama, the dem’s MOST liberal senator or Hillary, fifth from the most).</p>
<p>McCain seems like a pragmatist to me, and a real statesman who will put partisanship aside to actually get something accomplished in government. That’s what we pay them to do.<br>
I don’t care what his age is - we need his kind of approach to politics/government & I’ll take him for as long as I can get him. I just hope he picks a good running mate.<br>
And FWIW, I’m not that worried about whether he’s up to the job - I’ve seen him in action - he’s spry, energetic & enthusiastic.</p>
<p>“I revile Hillary Clinton.”</p>
<p>Can you say if it’s more her personality, or her policies?</p>
<p>If personality, there’s not much anyone can do about that.</p>
<p>If policies, which of them are undesirable compared with Obama’s on the same subject?</p>
<p>I hope those of you who believe that Mcain will bring the Republican party back from the neocon extreme realize who he is listening to in the foreign affairs dept. His advisors and early supporters - Bill Kristol, Randy Scheunemann, Gary Schmitt, Randy Kagan- all early backers of Bush’s Iraq invasion and share the Bush/Cheney vision, and I believe MCain’s, in remaking the map the middle east to suit US interests. If you agree with the Project for a New American Century and want us to see this as our main goal of the next hundred years, then fine. But know what you’re signing up for with McCain.</p>
<p>“Extremist” is in the eye of the beholder.</p>
<p>"Can you say if it’s more her personality, or her policies?</p>
<p>If personality, there’s not much anyone can do about that."</p>
<p>Oh, it’s personality, history and most especially HUSBAND. I think I’ve been pretty honest about that. It’s totally personal, visceral loathing. Bash away.</p>
<p>“It’s totally personal, visceral loathing. Bash away.”</p>
<p>Nah, it’s okay, probably similar to how I feel about Bush (but NOT about Laura 
), but also including most Bush policies.</p>
<p>^I love America. :)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yep, I totally agree. I’ve considered myself a centrist, and an Independent for many years. We don’t drink the KoolAid for anybody. And, more than the partisans of either the left, or the right, I think we Independents are generally much more capable of nuanced and objective thinking.</p>