I’d rather have McCain who is willing and prepared to listen to the commanders on the ground. A guy who will change course if it is the right thing to do. W Bush was stubborn in his reliance on Don Rumsfeld. Obama will be JUST AS STUBBORN in his insistance on leaving, no matter the consequenses or the facts on the ground. I’ll prefer the guy who has first hand experience in combat and lengthy experience in Washington in the precarious situation we’re in.

Age is age. With it comes wisdom. McCains age hardly disqualifies him. If anything its a plus in comparison to Obamas complete lack of experience in all facets of government.

Vote experience over charisma. Obama is a left wing Bush waiting to happen.

John McCain will say or do anything to be President!

McCain was against torture before he voted for it!

McCain voted against Bush’s tax breaks for the “wealthiest Americans” before he now supports them!

McCain was against religious “intolerance” in 2000, now he seeks out and get the endorsements of know religious bigots John Hagee and Ron Parsley, Catholic and Muslim haters, respectively!

McCain is for “family values” who divorces his wife who raised his kids when he was a POW to marry an Arizona heiress and get a Congressional seat!

McCain is a true foreign policy expert who admits to illegally smuggling alcohol into Saudi Arabia, an ally, to curry favor with Congress! And dumps the empties in front of the French delegations hotel room door!

We’ve had enough of flip-flopper McCain, he should open an IHOP!

It is Barack Obamamessiah who is the unknown quantity. The greatest damage to our country would be caused by barack Obamammessiah surrendering Iraq to al_Qaeda. The greatest damage would be done with Barack Obamamessiah’s plan to meet unconditionally with every terrorist dictator in the world. His inexperience and niavete scares the leaders of Western Europe and reassures Amadininutjob and bin Laden. Every terrorist in the world supports barack Obamamessiah. barack Obamammessiah is truly a dangerous individual.

He “lost” 3 multi-million dollar aircraft,nearly sank an aircraft carrier (ours), managed to get shot down, and resigned because he got passed over twice for promotion. No thanks.

McCain may not be the candidate we would completely want. However, Obama makes our decision a fairly easy one.

Obama is willing to talk to nations that despise Israel, deny the Holocaust, etc. Do we want a Jimmy Carter 2 for foreign policy or do we want someone who will stick to his guns and stand his ground instead of living in la-la-Barney land.

Obama wants nationalized health care. You really want the quality of health care to decrease and your taxes to skyrocket? We all know the government is a well efficient machine and will spend that large portion of your income well.

Obama thinks that punishing oil companies will help the price of oil go down. Where in the history of the world has something similar worked well? At least McCain wants to increase supply which will have a better effect than B.O.’s plan.

Obama offers CHANGE! Change? What kind of change? Who cares as long as its change, right? Change is always better, right? Looking at his foreign policy, economic ideas, and health care plan that will costs a lot and deliver little, I am sincerely worried if he is elected.

If Obama is elected, it’s the stupidity of the average voter falling for his CHANGE!

McCain is looking a lot better than Obama right now and I have not even mentioned that great spiritual mentor Wright! Can’t be wrong about him.

Saying ‘Obama is a a left-wing Bush waiting to happen’ is quite a piece of presumptuous sophistry, RCJ, especially given what I’m guessing your voting
choices for the Oval Office were since 2000. Simultaneously you choose the status quo under the guise of approving ‘experience over charisma’, while throwing the reputation of GWB under that rhetorical bus every other person seems to be using this season. The sophistry you spin in this regard is a tad presumptuous, since it assumes Obama’s talents for mis-government will be as great as his predecessor(no mean feat, RCJ, no mean feat to say the least).

I’m not so sure Obama, if elected, will be able to avoid the upcoming icebergs for America Inc in it’s role as the sinking super-power, but it really ‘chokes the clown’, so to speak, to say he will be as congenitally
stubborn(and lacking any enlightened vision) as the man from Crawford. That’s a big, big leap, pardner.

I would, however, if forecasting the next 4 years for this nation (not through the example of the Titanic) through the prism of Moby Dick, be four-square in favor of casting John McCain for the role of Ahab.

Who is John McCain? If you haven’t done your research and looked up both candidates voting records, stances on issues, history, and listened to both of them speak, why even bother to vote? How can you say John McCain is the wrong man for the job if you even admit you don’t know anything about him?

I’m trying to get a corner in the market for white cloth, and sticks to fly the white cloth on. I support Obama. We could surrender to the terrorists. I would make money. Then I could make huge campaign donations to make Obama, King.

Of course when the Chinese call our debts due, I’ll invest my earnings into their takeover of the Oil Shale in our 5 western States, HOW CAN I LOSE?

Tim Hogan says McCain will say anything to become president because of his flip-flopping. Funny Hogan, I was thinking the same thing about Obama.

Obama rejects the Bush my-way-or-the-highway “cowboy” foreign policy. Obama repeatedly said he wishes to meet with enemy/thug leaders without preconditions. But wait!

He now says only if he decides to meet in the first place. And if he decides – to which he may not – he’ll do so without preconditions. And if he decides not to, his decision will have been made without preconditions, unless, of course, he decides to meet after all – but only without preconditions. And if he decides not to meet, he’ll make that decision without any preconditions, just as he would make the decision to meet without the precondition of no preconditions. But if he decides to meet, without preconditions, he’ll do so solely when, where and if he decides to – without preconditions.

That’s change.

Unlike President Bush, who “neglected” the Israeli/Palestinian peace process until the waning days of his administration, Obama intends to get on it immediately. Last week, he told America’s Israel Public Affairs Committee – America’s leading pro-Israel lobby – that he supports a two-state solution, with Jerusalem as the sole, undivided capital of Israel. (The Bush administration, currently in negotiations with the Israelis and Palestinians, hasn’t taken a position on this thorny issue, preferring the parties to negotiate between themselves.) After Obama’s statement, the Palestinians immediately cried, “Foul!” and said there would be no discussions with that stipulation! Hamas, the Palestinian terror group, called him no different from Bush. Thus, with this demand, a President Obama threatens to derail talks from the very beginning. But wait!

The next day, Obama said that, well, “obviously” the issue of Jerusalem should be decided by the Israelis and Palestinians – adopting the same position as “cowboy” Bush.

That’s hope.

On deterring Iran from getting a nuclear weapon, Obama accused the Bush administration of “saber rattling.” Obama’s website calls for aggressive diplomacy, but mentions nothing about a military option. But wait!

He told AIPAC, “Let there be no doubt: I will always keep the threat of military action on the table to defend our security and our ally Israel.”

What about Iran’s Revolutionary Guard? When Sen. Clinton voted to declare the Revolutionary Guard a terror organization, Obama criticized her and deemed the vote irresponsibly militant. But wait!

He told AIPAC that Iran’s Revolutionary Guard is, indeed, a terror organization. So why did he vote otherwise, and attack Clinton? Well, said Obama at the time, it was an unnecessarily belligerent move. But apparently, now they are terrorists because, well, it isn’t as belligerent to say so today as it was to say so yesterday.

So back at you Hogan, you good old fashioned style liberal hypocrit.

Kay, that is an excellent point. I have done a lot of research on Obama.
At this point I really don’t care who wins in Nov. But what I do know is that people like Ed have done a lot more research on McCain but not so much on Obama. If they did, they would feel a lot differently. I also know that I would prefer a seasoned citizen in the White House over a young skull full of mush just as I trust senior citizens to vote for the best candidate over the judgment of the young who haven’t a clue what fascism, socialism, or Marxism are. New isn’t always better.