Gallup Daily: McCain 48%, Obama 43%

[IAMX 3,055]

You are such a joke. Did you take stupid classes or were you born that way?

Can't actually take on the issues anymore? Didn't think so.

Find some more names to call if you can't actually form an intelligent response. Or maybe quit trying to speak for others.

Your response was so stupid that there is no intelligent response. Anyone that says commanding in the military isn't executive experience has to have rocks in his head.

Let me try and make it easier for you.

executive (ĭg-zĕk'yə-tĭv)

n.

1. A person or group having administrative or managerial authority in an organization.

2. The chief officer of a government, state, or political division.

3. The branch of government charged with putting into effect a country's laws and the administering of its functions.

4. Computer Science. A set of coded instructions designed to process and control other coded instructions.

I guess you weren't capable of reading so here, I'll re-iterate it for you, Gary, and then you figure it out from there:

However, unless McCain is going to march his wrinkled a$$ into war himself, following in the footsteps of the Bush War Doctrine, it means nothing in terms of actually doing a President's work.

[GaryC 7]

SRVT you will get carpal tunnel before GaryC admits anything... the guy believes what he wants to believes, ignores facts that don't support his argument & twists your words. Basically he's closed minded & biased. He probably falls into that 30% that still feels Bush has done a bang up job over the last 8 years. You should feel sorry for the guy, not fight with him.

As for McCain's military service that is commendable & shouldn't be challenged. Now the Republicans (being the hypocrites that they are) dragged John Kerry's military record through the mud & once again the American people were too uninformed & gullible to see through the lie (Bush hid out in the Air National Guard during Vietnam). Now I am no fan of John Kerry as a politician, but they guy served in Vietnam (and was highly decorated) so if the Republicans had any decency at all they wouldn't have attacked his military record.

Now I AM a military veteran & have served in a hazardous duty zone (Bosnia) and a war zone (Iraq). I also have enough medals to qualify as a Mexican General. With that being said you should separate McCain the war hero/POW and McCain the politician. I have infinite respect for John McCain for his service, but he is quickly losing my respect as a politician because of his smear campaigns.

Thank you for your service. While we may disagree I do respect you for your sacrifice.

You are such a joke. Did you take stupid classes or were you born that way?

Can't actually take on the issues anymore? Didn't think so.

Find some more names to call if you can't actually form an intelligent response. Or maybe quit trying to speak for others.

Your response was so stupid that there is no intelligent response. Anyone that says commanding in the military isn't executive experience has to have rocks in his head.

Let me try and make it easier for you.

executive (ĭg-zĕk'yə-tĭv)

n.

1. A person or group having administrative or managerial authority in an organization.

2. The chief officer of a government, state, or political division.

3. The branch of government charged with putting into effect a country's laws and the administering of its functions.

4. Computer Science. A set of coded instructions designed to process and control other coded instructions.

I guess you weren't capable of reading so here, I'll re-iterate it for you, Gary, and then you figure it out from there:

However, unless McCain is going to march his wrinkled a$$ into war himself, following in the footsteps of the Bush War Doctrine, it means nothing in terms of actually doing a President's work.

That was the part I was laughing about. How can you say his military experience has nothing to do with doing a presidents work? It makes him a lot more qualified than a community organizer.

[IAMX 3,055]

SRVT you will get carpal tunnel before GaryC admits anything... the guy believes what he wants to believes, ignores facts that don't support his argument & twists your words. Basically he's closed minded & biased. He probably falls into that 30% that still feels Bush has done a bang up job over the last 8 years. You should feel sorry for the guy, not fight with him.

I'm pretty much on the line of ignoring him (he's been favoring personal attacks when he can't logically debate), but if I didn't find combating with him fun, I'd have quit ages ago.

As for McCain's military service that is commendable & shouldn't be challenged. Now the Republicans (being the hypocrites that they are) dragged John Kerry's military record through the mud & once again the American people were too uninformed & gullible to see through the lie (Bush hid out in the Air National Guard during Vietnam). Now I am no fan of John Kerry as a politician, but they guy served in Vietnam (and was highly decorated) so if the Republicans had any decency at all they wouldn't have attacked his military record.

I agree, no one should challenge another's military record. I'm not challenging McCain's honorable service.

Many forget I respect the guy as a person. I've met him, and I've shook hands with him, just like I did with Hillary. Both of them were guests at my previous employer who constantly had celebrities and politicians over in the biggest conference room on the main campus (building 40). Interesting story to tell there. Also met a serving four star Navy General, as well.

However, the point I address is contrary to Gary's clearly slanted view of irrelevancy that being in a war is relative to sitting in a seat in the White House. It is not relevant Presidential experience unless McCain, while continuing Bush's War Doctrine, actually went to the war, himself. It's just more of Gary's pundit-like views that need some harsh refuting, since he can't really argue very logically.

And it's those smear campaigns you suggest that detract us from the real issues, that both parties aim for, which has me going third party. It's either that or not voting, and I think not voting is the most illogical choice you can make.

Edited September 13, 2008 by SRVT

[GaryC 7]

SRVT you will get carpal tunnel before GaryC admits anything... the guy believes what he wants to believes, ignores facts that don't support his argument & twists your words. Basically he's closed minded & biased. He probably falls into that 30% that still feels Bush has done a bang up job over the last 8 years. You should feel sorry for the guy, not fight with him.

I'm pretty much on the line of ignoring him (he's been favoring personal attacks when he can't logically debate), but if I didn't find combating with him fun, I'd have quit ages ago.

As for McCain's military service that is commendable & shouldn't be challenged. Now the Republicans (being the hypocrites that they are) dragged John Kerry's military record through the mud & once again the American people were too uninformed & gullible to see through the lie (Bush hid out in the Air National Guard during Vietnam). Now I am no fan of John Kerry as a politician, but they guy served in Vietnam (and was highly decorated) so if the Republicans had any decency at all they wouldn't have attacked his military record.

I agree, no one should challenge another's military record. I'm not challenging McCain's honorable service.

Many forget I respect the guy as a person. I've met him, and I've shook hands with him, just like I did with Hillary. Both of them were guests at my previous employer who constantly had celebrities and politicians over in the biggest conference room on the main campus (building 40). Interesting story to tell there. Also met a serving four star Navy General, as well.

However, the point I address is contrary to Gary's clearly slanted view of irrelevancy that being in a war is relative to sitting in a seat in the White House. It is not relevant Presidential experience unless McCain, while continuing Bush's War Doctrine, actually went to the war, himself. It's just more of Gary's pundit-like views that need some harsh refuting, since he can't really argue very logically.

And it's those smear campaigns you suggest that detract us from the real issues, that both parties aim for, which has me going third party. It's either that or not voting, and I think not voting is the most illogical choice you can make.

You keep saying that military experience isn't executive experience unless he plans on leading the charge personally. How do you justify that? While you accuse me of not using logic this shows that you are the one not using any logic. Try telling Ike and Teddy R that military experience means nothing in regards to the presidency. In todays world I would take military experience over community organizing any day.

[dalegg 143]

I am going to laugh so freaking hard if McCain wins this. This is like watching the New York Giants playing the New England Patriots. Giants meant nothing to me, but seeing an upset like that was one the greatest moments in my life.

Do you think if the Republicans actually win this election Howard Dean is fired? Or maybe Bill and Hillary just get to go kick him in the butt a few hundred times.

[nowhereman 1]

Having served in the military is a bonus for a politician... you would hope that it would give him/her perspective about what someone in uniform has to deal with. At times McCain seems to get this & other times I think the Bush inner circle puts his nuts in a vice & he backs down. One example is McCain's stance on water boarding... God knows he knows about torture. At first McCain is strongly against it & then he flip flops. Someone got to him (probably Cheney); there's no other explanation for this.

Another example is the war in Iraq... McCain knows damn well that the Bush administration started the war based on false intelligence (its not the liberals who think this, its pretty much an accepted fact, as no WMD's were ever found) yet McCain will never say this. He also knows that despite the improvements in security, the Iraqis have done next to nothing to improve conditions in Iraq (the surge was intended to give the Iraqis breathing room to make these changes). Given these facts (that McCain is very much aware of) he continues to ignore the parts of the truth that he would rather not think about & he says that we're winning the war in Iraq and should stay there indefinitely.

My point? McCain is experienced & has a commendable military record but with all of his experience & military service he intends to carry on many of the failed policies of the Bush administration. Die hard Republicans will bash liberals, ignore the facts & stay the course despite all of this and that is exactly why McCain should not be elected.

[dalegg 143]

One example is McCain's stance on water boarding... God knows he knows about torture. At first McCain is strongly against it & then he flip flops. Someone got to him (probably Cheney); there's no other explanation for this.

I have to ask a question on this one. Do you really think supporting torture of suspected terrorists is a losing position with most Americans? I don't think so. I think most of us could give less than a rat's ####### about this issue, and even if they are being really, really tortured, we aren't losing sleep. Sure some of us have a real issue with it, but the majority, eh. Why make a big deal of this one, really?

[Brad and Vika 129]

McCain has pulled ahead because Palin gave a really good speech & lets face it she's a babe. What amazes me though is how incredibly stupid most Americans are, because McCain has pulled so much ####### that is so ridiculous that anyone with half a brain should be able see through it. Two recent examples are McCain's attempt to base his campaign on change & the controversy about the "lipstick on a pig" comment.

McCain saying his campaign is all about change is laughably transparent and ridiculous. The Obama campaign is based on change & McCain is obviously trying to steal this idea. I mean ####### over? Secondly anyone who spends a minute listening to what Obama said can conclude without a doubt that the "pig" he was talking about is McCain's policies & the "lipstick" is trying to repackage the same ####### & make it look nice. It wasn't remotely sexist and McCain knows this. McCain should apologize for making something out of absolutely nothing, not Obama.

As for GaryC and Rogue everyone is entitled to their opinions, but just like the Repuplicans you guys are long on rhetoric and short on actual facts. If you support the Republican's policies then by all means vote Republican, but people like you guys who bash liberals just for the sake of doing it are exactly the reason why this country is so polarized (and I'm not even a liberal, I'm an Independent). You can have a respectful disagreement with someone, but if you piss all over them & then want them to cooperate with you (this is exactly what the Bush administration has done over the past 8 years) don't expect much cooperation.

Fear you say? No, it's not fear... it's disappointment with the high percentage of Americans that form opinions & vote on sound bites, half truths, lies and rhetoric.

This is different than where? Where do people form their opinions from the well published, thoroughly vetted positions of any candidate?

One example is McCain's stance on water boarding... God knows he knows about torture. At first McCain is strongly against it & then he flip flops. Someone got to him (probably Cheney); there's no other explanation for this.

I have to ask a question on this one. Do you really think supporting torture of suspected terrorists is a losing position with most Americans? I don't think so. I think most of us could give less than a rat's ####### about this issue, and even if they are being really, really tortured, we aren't losing sleep. Sure some of us have a real issue with it, but the majority, eh. Why make a big deal of this one, really?

[Brad and Vika 129]

However, unless McCain is going to march his wrinkled a$$ into war himself, following in the footsteps of the Bush War Doctrine, it means nothing in terms of actually doing a President's work.

Your slant to make it executive experience is laughable.

I respectfully disagree. I think that his experience as a bona fide war hero lends him a tremendous amount of credibility, and on the subject of war (and interrogation v. torture), he speaks with great authority.

[IAMX 3,055]

Having served in the military is a bonus for a politician... you would hope that it would give him/her perspective about what someone in uniform has to deal with. At times McCain seems to get this & other times I think the Bush inner circle puts his nuts in a vice & he backs down. One example is McCain's stance on water boarding... God knows he knows about torture. At first McCain is strongly against it & then he flip flops. Someone got to him (probably Cheney); there's no other explanation for this.

Another example is the war in Iraq... McCain knows damn well that the Bush administration started the war based on false intelligence (its not the liberals who think this, its pretty much an accepted fact, as no WMD's were ever found) yet McCain will never say this. He also knows that despite the improvements in security, the Iraqis have done next to nothing to improve conditions in Iraq (the surge was intended to give the Iraqis breathing room to make these changes). Given these facts (that McCain is very much aware of) he continues to ignore the parts of the truth that he would rather not think about & he says that we're winning the war in Iraq and should stay there indefinitely.

My point? McCain is experienced & has a commendable military record but with all of his experience & military service he intends to carry on many of the failed policies of the Bush administration. Die hard Republicans will bash liberals, ignore the facts & stay the course despite all of this and that is exactly why McCain should not be elected.

[nowhereman 1]

One example is McCain's stance on water boarding... God knows he knows about torture. At first McCain is strongly against it & then he flip flops. Someone got to him (probably Cheney); there's no other explanation for this.

I have to ask a question on this one. Do you really think supporting torture of suspected terrorists is a losing position with most Americans? I don't think so. I think most of us could give less than a rat's ####### about this issue, and even if they are being really, really tortured, we aren't losing sleep. Sure some of us have a real issue with it, but the majority, eh. Why make a big deal of this one, really?

Dalegg first of all you completely missed my point (whoosh). McCain was strongly opposed to water boarding & then he was suddenly for it. Do you honestly think that he just woke up one morning & changed his mind out of the blue? Of course he didn't... one of the Bush cronies got to him. Secondly I served in Iraq and I can tell you that it's nearly impossible to distinguish a terrorist from a regular citizen, so if we start to get fast & free with the Geneva convention we will end up torturing as many innocent people (if not more) than terrorists. If that doesn't bother you then perhaps you weren't raised properly.

Edited September 13, 2008 by nowhereman

[dalegg 143]

One example is McCain's stance on water boarding... God knows he knows about torture. At first McCain is strongly against it & then he flip flops. Someone got to him (probably Cheney); there's no other explanation for this.

I have to ask a question on this one. Do you really think supporting torture of suspected terrorists is a losing position with most Americans? I don't think so. I think most of us could give less than a rat's ####### about this issue, and even if they are being really, really tortured, we aren't losing sleep. Sure some of us have a real issue with it, but the majority, eh. Why make a big deal of this one, really?

Dalegg first of all you completely missed my point (whoosh). McCain was strongly opposed to water boarding & then he was suddenly for it. Do you honestly think that he just woke up one morning & changed his mind out of the blue? Of course he didn't... one of the Bush cronies got to him. Secondly I served in Iraq and I can tell you that it's nearly impossible to distinguish a terrorist from a regular citizen, so if we start to get fast & free with the Geneva convention we will end up torturing as many innocent people (if not more) than terrorists. If that doesn't bother you then perhaps you weren't raised properly.

No, I know your point was on flip-flopping, but I was just taking a moment to question why this has been made into a campaign issue in the first place. This isn't even a major issue. Obama says he's going to roll back tax cuts, now he says because the economy is in a slump he may not do it right away afterall. So is he saying he's changed his mind, is he flip flopping, or is he bowing to pressure? THIS is an issue that actually affects people, but I've heard this topic about water boarding brought up more times since Obama made that statement than that statement itself.

Edited September 13, 2008 by dalegg

[dalegg 143]

Dalegg first of all you completely missed my point (whoosh).

Oh, how cute! You typed in the "whoosh" there to symbolize that your brilliant point went over my head. I didn't even notice that. I'm so stupid.

[nowhereman 1]

It's OK for a politician to modify his/her view based on new information (you would hope that they would do this). To change your view because you are giving in to some group isn't OK. Sometimes its hard to tell the difference, but its an important distinction. There's no new information about water boarding (I'm pretty sure the military & the Geneva Convention still consider it torture) so for a former POW to flip flop yea that does & should raise some eyebrows.

[alienlovechild 75]

Another example is the war in Iraq... McCain knows damn well that the Bush administration started the war based on false intelligence (its not the liberals who think this, its pretty much an accepted fact, as no WMD's were ever found) yet McCain will never say this.

Hey, you're a veteran of the Iraq War, right? Weren't lot of troops in MOPP gear during the invasion? Why were ADA troops sent to Israel in 1998? Why were Iraqi generals wondering chemical weapons were going to be used? There is little evidence for false intelligence but there is a case for bad intel. There is a difference.

He also knows that despite the improvements in security, the Iraqis have done next to nothing to improve conditions in Iraq (the surge was intended to give the Iraqis breathing room to make these changes).

So it's all a waste ot time and you and your brothers-in arms did nothing that mattered in Iraq. If that's the case then wait for the same reception Vietnam vets got as losers for losing a war. I don't buy it but I can see that attitude developing if Iraq goes the way of South Vietnam after we pulled out.