<p>
Well said.</p>
<p>Hindoo-
Yup. Double practice sessions have started this week! I am off to pick up D in a bit. She is excited about soccer this fall, even though it means getting up at 5:00am this week. She is a sophomore, but was told yesterday she is on the varsity team. Yippeee…(She had to call her brother last night to tell him of course.) :)</p>
<p>Another sokkerkid…another issue. But, I am in favor of the arts in school too. She is also in the band. (saxmom was a bit sketchy for a screen name…) ;)</p>
<p>My daughter made varsity as a sophomore (in high school) as well! It’s a wonderful four years that flies by way too fast. She’s now the starting outside (left) mid for College of Wooster (as a soph), about five hours from where we live. We’ll see a few games–but not so many as to “invade” her space. … The arts are important to us as well, although they’re being whittled away a bit every year in our part of the country due to lack of funding. … I have a theater girl, an athlete, a poet, a pianist, a future Jane Austen. … But not fodder for a war I don’t believe in!</p>
<p>sokkermom–“Double sessions.” We call them the dreaded “two-a-days” here in Kentucky!</p>
<p>^I may pm you in a couple of years to find out about women’s college soccer. So, you’ll have to stay on cc for the duration. For now, we will enjoy this stage of her life. (we hope.) It seems that we may enjoy some days more than others.;)</p>
<p>They made them run 3 miles at the first practice. (Now we have to deal with blood sugar stabilization techniques. There is always something! Extreme exercise is a challenge! )</p>
<p>…Sorry to everyone else for the off topic excursion.</p>
<p>“Do you really, honestly believe that we’re weakening the terrorist networks or destroying them entirely? It’s the height of naivete if you do.”</p>
<p>These were not my words but the words of a German journalist with a decidedly anti-Bush perspective who has been to Iraq multiple times. Don’t you think it a bit presumptuous of you, sitting in your living room watching the nightly news, to be telling this reporter who is on the ground in Iraq that he is naive? Your myopia on this is what this reporter is trying to expose.</p>
<p>You are so right Fundingfather. I’m quite sure I’m being presumptious while I sit in my living room, snacking on bon-bons and listening to all the left-wing media lie about the death and mayhem in Iraq. … Of course, they’re wrong. They’re always wrong, because we’re AMERICA and we’re always right and our beady-eyed simpleton president is always right, and we always do the correct thing and we always win. So to question anything going on in Iraq, or our reasoning behind attacking that country is, well, audacity beyond belief. … Who exactly is it that you’re believing as spreading the gospel truth about Iraq?</p>
<p>“Of course, they’re wrong. They’re always wrong, because we’re AMERICA and we’re always right and our beady-eyed simpleton president is always right”</p>
<p>Hindoo, I’m sorry. I thought that I remembered posts from you that were indicative of an open-minded person. I guess I was wrong. The quote from you above would indicate that your judgement of Bush and the war is so clouded that there is no hope of talking to you rationally on that topic so I won’t continue.</p>
<p>fundingfather–I used to be much more open-minded about Bush and his minyons. Not anymore.</p>
<p>Hindoo, et. al.</p>
<p>Why say McCain is “ancient history”? I just saw him at a Town Meeting Today & he seems to have the most courage, integrity and experience of any of the candidates in either party. He shouldn’t be discounted just because the polls say he is struggling or because he hasn’t raised as much money as everyone else.</p>
<p>Obviously his stand on the war in Iraq isn’t very popular, and this issue is the one that is costing him the most. Americans are tired of this war and just want it to go away (me too!). Unfortunately, the enemy isn’t going to go away just because we stop fighting.</p>
<p>I hope everyone who reads this will consider supporting McCain. He’s in sort of a “Catch-22”: Not Liberal enough to garner great support in the media, and not Conservative enough to be hailed as the Leader of the Republican Party. Perhaps this is an indicator of the common sense he’s brought to politics!</p>
<p>Anyway, don’t count him out just yet - instead, think about supporting him! Let’s give that campaign a little boost!</p>
<p>After all the lies, the spin, the divisive dismissiveness, how can anybody believe a word coming out of the White House? They say one thing today, another thing tomorrow and if (by some miracle) they are called on it, they just shrug. Look at the footage of Cheney saying what a disaster invading Baghdad would be during the first Gulf War. Now it’s somehow all different. When they are shown tape of them saying something, they’ll deny they ever said it. “Who are you going believe – me or your lying eyes?”</p>
<p>Give up your entrenched belief that these guys are somehow Republicans. They are not. They used the GOP’s passions to succeed with no intention of performing anything they promised. (Remember “No nation building” or “Uniter not Divider.” Or that old favorite “compassionate conservative.”) They do not subscribe to any core Republican philosophy. They treated Congress with disrespect, even when it was held by a majority of the GOP. This group of neo-cons have done away with a thousand years of legal protections and are increasingly spying on their own people without any checks or guards on their intrusions. You may say “I have nothing to hide” but you don’t have any recourse if the government decides you are somehow a suspected person or knows someone who might be. The Constitution is a roadblock and the Geneva Conventions are ‘quaint’. The Executive Orders signed by GWB, not to mention his plethora of signing statements, should terrify any thinking American. </p>
<p>They wanted war with Iraq. They wanted tax cuts for the richest citizens. They wanted a unitary executive. To do it, they ran up the biggest deficit in history. These are not Republican values. Stop supporting people who think of you as ‘the mob’ or as ‘nuts’, will you? You don’t want to go left, fine. You should live and be well. But at least, at the very least, believe in the things you claim to believe in and quit following those who don’t.</p>
<p>McCain, liberal? Not a chance. “annoyingly maverick” is the closest you’ll get to it if you look at this voting record. One of the most dangerous places to be is standing between McCain and a microphone or camera…the world is getting safer in that small regard because his campaign is dead dead meat.</p>
<p>He won’t get the Democrats and Independents because of Iraq and he won’t get the Republicans because of immigration and general suspicion that he’s insufficiently conservative…though some of the same people turn around and give a pass to Rudy Giuliani, LOL.</p>
<p>As for his so-called integrity, he surrendered it when he pandered to Bush in exchange for becoming the putative “inside” candidate instead of the “outsider” the next time around. Sad. Somewhere inside there there was once a better man.</p>
<p>
Nope,1SM. A healthy majority (61 percent) of Democrats are satisfied with their choices. Only something of 39 percent of Republicans can say the same thing.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Could you elaborate on how exactly he purportedly did that??</p>
<p>…and we all know he isn’t exactly a "Liberal’ - he’s just a bit further “left” (centrist? pragmatic?) than the radical right-wingers & ideologues who currently seem to dominate the Rebublican party, and thus he lacks the needed support within his own party.</p>
<p>I agree that he may have sufficiently alienated enough people on both sides of the aisle to prevent him from getting elected! Perhaps that is the exact reason why his campaign deserves another look! :)</p>
<p>Obviously he isn’t afraid to take an unpopular stand if it is the right thing to do - that is courage, but unfortunately it appears to be political suicide as well!</p>
<p>Anyway, you can’t deny that he is the most experienced, qualified & knowledgable candidate. Shouldn’t that count for something - even if you don’t agree with him on every single issue!</p>
<p>
Well, yes I can deny it. And I do.</p>
<p>
Not if I don’t agree with him on what I regard as key issues, no.</p>
<p>There’s also a logical fallacy in your arguments: If Group A (Conservative Republicans) don’t like him, then he must be okay. Does not follow. Any more than if A is bad, then anti-A must be good.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>When he started fibbing to the American people about Iraq, including the whopper about Gen. Petraeus riding around outside the Green Zone in an unarmored Humvee. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Sorry, but the above illustrates that he’s either profoundly ignorant, profoundly detached from reality or profoundly dishonest. Any or all of which make him profoundly unqualified.</p>
<p>In other news, the man claims to be completely “stumped” as to whether condoms prevent HIV. This is not someone who needs to be setting policy for our country. But it’s a very good example of his pandering to the radical right.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You got a more experienced candidate than someone who’s been a senator since 1987? Who would that be??</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I wasn’t making that argument. I was merely implying that because both Conservatives as well as Republicans have disagreed w/ McCain it demonstrates that he doesn’t make decisions based strictly alomg partisan lines.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>…and what are the key issues with which you disagree??</p>
<p>You never answered the question about how he “pandered” to Bush. Seems as tho’ they haven’t always seen eye-to-eye on every issue. BTW, at the Town Meeting today, McCain expressed quite a bit of criticism for Rumsfeld’s execution of the war.</p>
<p>Also - the “smiley” was indicating a somewhat “tongue-in-cheek” remark!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Funny how when Rumsfeld forbid his staff to plan for anything six months after the invasion, because it would all be over by then…McCain didn’t say a word of criticism then. When the DOD wouldn’t fund MRAVs for our soldiers because “the insurgency was in its last throes”, McCain didn’t utter a word of protest.</p>
<p>Quite frankly, all the right wingers are doing the same–trying like made to distance themselves in the public mind from everything that went wrong in Iraq. I know it’s heady stuff to meet a candidate in person, but McCain adopting this approach is nothing novel.</p>
<p>Yeah, McCain’s been in the Senate a long time, but that doesn’t necessarily mean he’ll be a good President. It’s what you do there that counts.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Oy! I forgot about that! Sheesh! That WAS a pretty big gaffe!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>LOL! But since when does condom use become part of White House policy? </p>
<p>(And can you say with 100% certainty that condoms DO prevent HIV??).</p>
<p>Hey, I’m not saying the guy is infallable, he just seems to be “better” than the other candidates (and shouldn’t be counted out just yet!).</p>
<p>I’m looking forward to the debates!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>He probably did - tht was something he specifically mentioned.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’ve been particularly impressed with his battles against pork-barrel spending. That’s a terrible practice in Washington and really needs to be stopped. He’s been a vanguard on that issue.</p>