<p>I think the over 40 crowd just believes he can change the system which is ironical because the real power lies in the Senate and the House. If you really want change vote out the incumbent. That means especially people like Biden, Teddy, Hagel, Byrd, etc. As far as I can see all of their experience has also screwed up this country, that old statement are you better off now? WV should ask are you better off now than 50 yrs ago when Byrd got in? Mass. should ask this too…how much better off are you? These are people who have sat here and said their heart breaks over the uninsured while their medical care is state of the art that costs nothing, most of them are millionaires who could afford paying their insurance, but they don’t. These are the same people who receive lifetime pensions after serving only a few yrs. The same people who increase their pay every few yrs, and citizens need to understand they have 2 homes to pay for! Sorry, again most are millionaires, and the home you are buying in the DC area is 1 mill plus! </p>
<p>I am voting against any incumbent regardless of their party. They have had just as long as Bush to turn this country around, they failed, thus I am saying you’re fired.</p>
<p>Bizzy, I’m so glad you’ve finally seen the LIGHT! Now, if you’d just stop blocking his face with your foot every time he appears on TV.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I sometimes agree with Charles Krauthammer, but not on this one. I could care less if Obama, McCain, or Captain Kangaroo had spoken in front of the Brandenburg Gate. Or the Arc de Triomphe, the Great Wall of China, the Pyramids, the Taj Mahal, Ground Zero, etc. So what? Why would Obama have to “earn” that right? I understand that he wasn’t there when Reagan demanded that Gorbachev tear down the Wall, but it’s just silly to say that it’s inappropriate for Obama speak at this very symbolic, public place because he’s somehow unworthy. Oh, pleeeeeeeeeze. … And Krauthammer’s snarky put-down of Obama for seeming to like himself too much–criminy-cripes! Why single him out? I guarantee you that big-wig politicos from far right to extreme left admire every last molecule of themselves, from head to toe. One would have to own an ego as big as all outdoors to even THINK oneself capable of taking on the toughest job in the world!</p>
<p>How comfortable are the McCain supporters here with their candidates sporadic slip-ups on foreign policy/political boundaries knowledge,which is supposedly his strong suit? I can think of three pretty glaring errors recently…yesterday saying Iraq and Pakistan shared a border, citing Chezchosolvakia as still being a country when its been broken up for 15 years and his mix up of Sunnis and Shiites?
Hows that for a mild mannered,polite question?
and for the record Spideygirl…
the New York Times said they would not publish McCain’s Op-Ed in the form in which it was submitted on Friday. They asked for editorial rewrite and clarifications. They specifically said they reserve this right with all ediotorials submitted. They have published op-ed pieces by him at least (I think they said) 7 times in the past.</p>
<p>cathymee, you are the the soul of grace and politeness. … At first I was willing to give McCain a complete pass on his occasional misspeaks. (At one point I believe Obama referred to 57 states, and I’m sure he knows better than that!) But McCain’s stumbles are starting to mount up, and you have to wonder. … Also, his temper worries me. He’s been known to fly into rages, cursing and swearing, flinging invective at fellow senators. In these scary times, we need someone capable of maintaining an even keel.</p>
<p>I think we should read Obama’s books, not because we believe for better or worse, that his accomplishments are few, but because he’s the Democratic candidate for president. I think we should also read McCain’s books. He has a couple too (actually more than a couple). Faith of my Fathers, and Dreams from my Father should make interesting side by side reading.</p>
<p>I am a lifelong Democrat and would be hard pressed to ever vote for someone who didnt believe in a womans right to choose but have admired McCain’s feistiness and independent streak in the past .I get the feeling this election is just going to be too much for him, physically and perhaps mentally. After seeing him stymied and flustered and grasping for words during one of the big interviews last week I told my H I don’t think he’ll make it through November…and I was serious.
Just for the record my D who was an Arizona resident at the time voted for him in his last Senate race.
I think he’s going to look pretty old/worn/unfresh,whatever term you want to use when he and Obama appear together on stage during their one on one debates.
I really really think he didnt intend to be the last Republican candidate standing after the Primary.Its just that the field was mediocre and other candidates imploded along the way.I think his win was a surprise to all,including him and his handlers.</p>
<p>McCain’s character: Keating 5. Look it up. Dumping wife who had the misfortune to be in an auto accident and not have beauty-queen looks any more in favor of much younger, now-prettier, woman with large fortune.</p>
<p>Let’s hear you dance around those things, for a start. BZ2010, having been in the military is no guarantee of “character” at all.</p>
<p>poetsheart:
It is a poor argument to raise shortcomings of others in order to justify ones flaws. A proper argument for defending your candidate would be addressing the strengths he has, instead of pointing out how bad the other candidates are.
I am not voting for McCain, and obviously not BO.
The point about McCain and Cindy having seperate tax returns is simply saying their money is seperate. Many married couples file seperate returns, they still live together, because they’re MARRIED. Cindy is the rich one who is the heiress of millions/billions of dollars, not John.
I am SHOCKED you have NOT heard any of the contoversial Michelle quotes:</p>
<p>“”…someone is going to have to give up a piece of their pie so that someone else can have more." Michelle Obama "<br>
Check out her speach when she subliminely criticized the Clintons for working as hedgefund managers in an Ohio speech.</p>
<p>ONCE AGAIN, you completely misunderstood my obama.house comment. THE ONLY REASON I have an issue with is house is that his family preaches “helping industry” and giving up a piece of your pie to help others. Ot’s hyporcitical, and that is why I have an issue, so PLEASE stop making generalizations that I have an issue with him having money. You clearly don’t understand the concept of practicing what you preach. I also have an issue with McCain making statements of lowering gas prices/conserving gas, and he personally drives a gas guzzler.
Try and understand statements before blowing them out of context, I truly expected you would re read the statement in order to better understand, and I have taken the time to TWICE rephrase my prior statement. I could care less how much the Obama’s rake in, but I do care when they ask others to sacrifice when they indulge themselves.
So don’t sit there and make assumptions based on a clear statement, I would expect better.
zoosermom-
Thanks you, you truly understand my position.</p>
<p>Re #68: That’s a point I’ve tried to make on other threads, to those who seem intent on questioning Obama’s character. For every Rezko or Rev. Wright on the Obama side, McCain has his Keating 5, youthful marital/philandering issues, etc. Neither man has cornered the market on character and integrity.</p>
<p>“The point about McCain and Cindy having seperate tax returns is simply saying their money is seperate. Many married couples file seperate returns, they still live together, because they’re MARRIED. Cindy is the rich one who is the heiress of millions/billions of dollars, not John.”</p>
<p>This is a good example of how something fairly routine can be spun: So, McCain and his wife have a prenup, and they file separate returns? If his own wife doesn’t trust him, why should we?</p>
<p>I don’t recall Bush “admitting” that he was an alcoholic.</p>
<p>The key thing to note about Bush and Clinton (and any other president who experimented, if there are any) is that they were smart enough NOT to come out with it. Clinton admitted smoking pot, but not inhaling (LOL), only because he would have been outed for it by someone who was there. An absence of forthright honesty could be interpreted by some as deception. I look at it as respecting the office, and knowing that the POTUS is a role model. </p>
<p>It is not helpful to talk about your experimentation when you want to be President. It’s also better to NOT have experimented. The fact that other presidents may have done so does not mean that it’s a less problematic thing in a future president. There are good reasons why some parts of government or the armed forces turn such people away. We deserve better.</p>
<p>True. If we are seeking people with genuine humility, selflessness, and exemplary character, the political marketplace might not be the best place to look</p>