In Search of Cindy McCain

« Return to Article

Discuss

Member Comments

  • Posted By: Driver of wagons @ 07/03/2008 12:35:31 PM



    UPDATE: Since a lot of you are sending words of support on here for General Clark, VoteVets.org started a petition......... (http://ga3.org/campaign/petitionclark)........ where you can sign to thank him, and tell him to keep it up. VoteVets.org will take the petition to General Clark, personally. Also, it's important to sign, so we can show the media that we've got his back.

  • Posted By: Driver of wagons @ 07/02/2008 7:51:16 PM



    Man, This is Rich

    Johnnie Midnight Strikes Again

    Let's keep in mind that no one seems to have argued with Clark on the merits of his claim. No one responded by saying, "General Clark is wrong -- in fact, McCain's POW experience does qualify him to be president." I suppose one could make that argument, but I haven't seen anyone actually make it. Instead, what they have said is that Clark was out of bounds to even raise the issue. To even assert that McCain's Vietnam experience isn't in and of itself a qualification for the Oval Office is such an unforgivable transgression that its merits don't need to be addressed.

    There is, however, one person who wouldn't disagree with Clark's statement that being a POW doesn't qualify you for the presidency. When asked by the National Journal in 2003, "Do you think that military service inherently makes somebody better equipped to be commander-in-chief?" this politician answered, "ABSOLUTELY NOT". History shows that some of our greatest leaders have had little or no military experience. ... When one advises [a presidential candidate] that they should be very careful about how much you talk about that, because you don't want it to sound self-serving." The politician who said "ABSOLUTELY NOT" was John McCain, and the presidential candidate he was talking about was John Kerry.

    Ha Ha Ha Ho Ho Ho He He He

    "McCain't and isn't able to Govern" is a mere mirage of himself

    extend your inevitable RISING PAIN with your vote for McCain


  • Posted By: willnotvoteobama @ 07/01/2008 10:48:29 AM

    KOOL-AID??????..From the kitchen of the obama sheeple!! take one heaping spoonful of an inexperienced elitist white male seeking self validation through exploitation of his african-american genetics. Combine two parts black liberation theology clerics spewing intolerance! With two parts of unrepentant intellectuals committed to the destruction of America. Stir in one cup of militant black wife harboring the overwhelming desire to stick it to whitey and one spoonful of typical white person grandmother mix well. Pour a gallon of anti-patriotism into tall glasses and sprinkle with naïve foreign policy ideations. Serve on a platter of meaningless oratorical hyperbole with a generous dollop of wealth re-distribution. Sprinkle liberally with zest of white guilt flip it and flop it till it tastes right. Serve large portions to the undiscerning and spellbound masses convinced that the Second Coming is upon America and now you have a complete recipe for disaster!

    • Posted By: sjpersonal @ 07/02/2008 4:55:53 PM

      So still absolutely nothing of substance to offer the human race. So so very sad!

  • Posted By: nfwriter @ 07/02/2008 3:03:11 PM

    So the Repuglicans plan to allow the Dems to win this one, eh? Right.
    I can see how it would benefit the Repugs to see it that way, seeing as how the Bush administration has left a trail of schmutz everywhere it has gone for the last eight years. Thanks a lot, Dick! Thanks, George! Thanks for everything, Repuglicans, you infantile, irresponsible thugs. If Rove politics leads to a generation of Democratic dominance, it wil be no worse than the GOP deserves.

  • Posted By: nfwriter @ 07/01/2008 10:32:45 PM

    Perhaps one day Cindy McCain will be the next first lady in some alternate universe. Her hub is the most awkward candidate in history next to his mentor, George W. Bush, and we've all ready seen how THAT ONE worked out. And mini-Rove, your Democratic 'recipe' is not so entertaining as it is pathetic, somewhat below the sheepish truth that first lady hopeful Cindy McCain swipes all her recipes from Martha Stewart. Now THAT's funny! Oh, you Repuglicans. You're just a laugh a minute.

  • Posted By: willnotvoteobama @ 07/01/2008 10:42:30 AM

    KOOL-AID??????..From the kitchen of the obama sheeple!! take one heaping spoonful of an inexperienced elitist white male seeking self validation through exploitation of his african-american genetics. Combine two parts black liberation theology clerics spewing intolerance! With two parts of unrepentant intellectuals committed to the destruction of America. Stir in one cup of militant black wife harboring the overwhelming desire to stick it to whitey and one spoonful of typical white person grandmother mix well. Pour a gallon of anti-patriotism into tall glasses and sprinkle with naïve foreign policy ideations. Serve on a platter of meaningless oratorical hyperbole with a generous dollop of wealth re-distribution. Sprinkle liberally with zest of white guilt flip it and flop it till it tastes right. Serve large portions to the undiscerning and spellbound masses convinced that the Second Coming is upon America and now you have a complete recipe for disaster!

  • Posted By: Driver of wagons @ 06/29/2008 2:20:26 PM



    Jimbo this is only the tip of the Iceberg there is more much but you will have to do your own home work. But I will at least give you the following. Mind you I have nothing against anyone patronizing pro sports, This is just one blatant example of Corporate Socialism or Welfare or what ever you wish to call it. And If I am not mistaken Corporate Welfare was a Reagan term he used quite often.

    Subsidies for sports teams have grown steadily. From 1995 through 2006, local, state and federal governments spent more than $10 billion subsidizing more than 50 new Major League stadiums and countless minor league facilities. "This trend is only accelerating: Government spending on sports facilities now soaks up more than $2 billion a year," Neil deMause, author of the book and Field of Schemes told congress in 2007.

    According to Forbes magizine, the Big Four sports had revenues in 2006 on $16.7 billion. They counted a tenth of that, slightly less than $1.7 billion, as operating income, which is one way to measure profits.

    Putting together the estimates by Forbes and deMause shows that the entire operating profit of commercial sports industry comes from the taxpayer. The subsidies, in fact, cover a third of a billion dollars in operating losses before this boost from the tax payers pushes the industry in to the black.

    Also, the figures from Forbes cover only operating profits and losses, not all cost. No business or industry can continue in the long run without covering all of its cost. Not taken in to account by Forbes were interest paid on borrowed money, taxes and paying down debt. Add in those cost and the actual LOSSES for the commercial sports industry, absent tax payer (Government) subsidies, (Corporate Socialism, Welfare what ever you chose to call it) are far greater thatn $340 million a year.

    Subsidy economics tend to drive prices up, not down, as recipients chase subsidies more than customers. Adam Smith figured this out in 1776. he examined the subsidies in his day for commercial fishing. Inhis era the word bounty referred to gifts the government bestowed on the owners of herring ships. He concluded that to collect subsidies, people will appear to engage in commercial activity. Smith wrote:

    The bounty [subsidy] to the white-herring fishery is a tonnage bounty: and is proportioned to the burden [size] of the ship, not to her diligence or success in the fishery: and it has, I am afraid, been too common for vessels to fit out for sole purpose of catching, not the fish, but the bounty.


    • Posted By: jimbo3800 @ 06/29/2008 9:09:00 PM

      Those are local governments that provide stadiums, etc. to entice local sports teams to either stay or relocate to their city. You many want to re-read my post; I specifically said examples where the US government is giving corporations something for nothing.

      Btw, I agree with your example, I think it is ridiculous when cities build stadiums for the NFL, etc.

  • Posted By: Driver of wagons @ 06/29/2008 10:21:37 AM




    You are right corporations should not be complicit in the act and or practice of Socialism . if that is what you are getting at "jimbo" but it is exactly what they are neck deep in. That is, government hand outs, kick backs, tax incentivesand or tax cuts, special favors,etc,... It may have some relevance to fair and just business practices if it worked for all of the American tax payers and or citizens but it is a pendulum that swings in favor of the corporations because our laws are so heavily waited in the direction of Corporate America. It is so in your face, arrogant, self centered, a business as usual practice and a catch phrase "just live with it" Which has proven to be for last 30 + years that corporations take full advantage of the Socialist or as some would label it as "WELFARE" hand outs that our government allows them that it is slowly turning our nation into servers and eliminating the producers.

    Within the next generation we will be a nation of buyers, servers and non producers. We are almost there now. Is it any reason why The American workers morale is at an all time low? When our government keeps handing out to corporations and taking away from the very people (The America Worker) the very back bone of our nation. THE AMERICAN DREAM for the common man/women is a fleeting memory. With our country being in bed with corporations they have destroyed our great society of what was once a nation of proud freeholders to a nation of beholders.

    A Corporate Society = Corporate Socialism
    All of the safety nets for Corporate America and nothing for its Citizens. We as America's Working Class wallow in what is left, "Corporate Droppings" and for me and 100s of millions of Americans it smells bad, extremely bad!

    Extend the Corporal Pain with your vote for McCain



    • Posted By: jimbo3800 @ 06/29/2008 11:52:09 AM

      Huh? Corporations pay nearly 50% of their profits in taxes, then declare a dividend which is taxed again. This is in addition to all of the payroll taxes on the people they employ, including the "2nd half" of social security taxes that most people don't even realize is being paid. And property taxes on all property, plants, and real estate that they own.

      Can you give me even 2 examples of so-called "corporate welfare"? Two real life examples where the US government is giving corporations something for nothing. Can you even provide one?

      Corporate welfare is a term made up by left-wing news media types, who don't understand the first thing about tax policy or tax law.

      • Posted By: loriw @ 06/29/2008 6:16:01 PM

        Don't forget that if the business has inventory they pay inventory taxes and then pay sales taxes when the product is sold.

  • Posted By: StormAZ100 @ 06/24/2008 8:53:32 PM

    Onepoker, you don't know what you're talking about, and you obviously do not live in Arizona. Yes, first time offenders do go to jail here often. I will agree that being married to John McCain was not her ticket out, however. I suspect it was because of the millions Daddy had that gave her the get out of jail ticket.

    And as for moral integrity? Excuse me, John McCain was married at the time he courted the then Cindy Hensley. He dumped his first wife after she had a disfiguring accident from which she has never recovered. Cindy was rich and 18 years his junior. Shame on him, yes, but also shame on her.

    • Posted By: onepoker @ 06/25/2008 4:20:53 PM

      actually I do live in Arizona and you don't typically go to jail for a first time offense.

      • Posted By: PReed1962 @ 06/29/2008 2:57:25 PM

        An offense equal to the one she committed! YES YOU DO! (unless you are rich with a lawyer). Don't you remember the lady who tried to flee the scene after attempting to pass a phoney script (with the 2 yr old in the car?). She got SHOT!! {yeah we all know the cops life , or was it his parked motercycles life? well one of them was in so much danger he had to shoot her from behind!) An Az Girl replies.. also- everyone read the " New Times" for a contemporary account of the drug scandle and then make up yur mind about her.

    • Posted By: Concerned Ctzn @ 06/24/2008 9:01:51 PM

      I'm hoping that Cindy McGame is a COUGAR! Hot! Hot!! Hot!!!

      Just joking Johnny ... it's all in fun sir! You're a lucky man!!!

      BTW, my true heart belongs to Gina L! Smile P ... LOL!!!!

      • Posted By: Pia1981 @ 06/24/2008 11:56:11 PM

        P is smiling, CC. You can check out Gina L on Youtube.

  • Posted By: eddiewhere @ 06/29/2008 1:16:37 PM

    McCain is a good guy however he promotes misguided policies. THE BIGGEST BEING THE IRAQ WAR.

    JUST LIKE HILLARY HE JUST DOESN"T GET IT. THE AMERICAN PEOPLE WANT OUT OF IRAQ. THE IRAQ WAR IS WHAT GAVE OBAMA A VICTORY IN IOWA. McCAIN is going to get SMOKED in this election unless he changes his stance on IRAQ.

    "NO AMERICAN LIFE IS WORTH IRAQI FREEDOM.

    ANYONE WHO DISAGREES IS NOT A REAL AMERICAN" eddiewhere 2008

    There is this argument out there that I hear our troops repeating over and over agian. WE CANNOT LEAVE UNTIL THE JOB IS DONE WE CANNOT LET OUR BROTHERS DIE IN VAIN.

    NOW THAT IS REAL BUL****. THAT STATEMENT IS GOVERNMENT IDEOLOGY AND NOT MILITARY IDEOLOGY.

    COLIN POWELL SAID IT BEST. DEFINE YOUR MISSION CLEARLY SET YOUR OBJECTIVES AND USE OVERWHELMING FORCE AKA SHOCK AND AWE to accomplish your mission.

    WE HAVE NO CLEAR AGENDA and NO CLEAR OBJECTIVES. WE ARE NOT SURE. SO HOW ON EARTH CAN WE JUSTIFY THE LOSS OF MORE AMERICAN LIVES. AS LONG AS WE STAY IN IRAQ YOUNG AMERICANS WILL CONTINUE TO DIE IN VAIN. WE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE HAVE MADE OUR POINT VERY CLEAR. WE ARE SICK OF IRAQ AND WE ARE SICK OF OUR DEPENDENCY ON MIDDLE EASTERN OIL.

    OBAMA WILL BE THE NEXT PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.

    THE LAST FALLACY I WANT TO ADDRESS IS THAT THE SURGE IS WORKING.

    THIS ARGUMENT IS SO CRAZY THAT IT IS HARD TO EXPLAIN.

    SURGE means temporary. OUR TROOPS PRESENCE IN THAT COUNTRY OF IRAQ IS THE MAIN REASON FUNDAMENTALIST HAVE FOR ATTACKING US.

    WE NEED A PRESIDENT THAT WILL DO WHAT IS BEST FOR AMERICA NOT WHAT IS BEST FOR IRAQ.

    THE LATEST FALLACY IS THAT WE SHOULD STAY UNTIL WE WIN. WE HAVE ALREADY LOST.ESPECIALLY THE AMERICAN TAX PAYER and those poor AMERICAN SOLDIERS WHO LOST THEIR LIFE FOR NO LEGITIMATE REASON. THE BLIND JUST CANNOT SEE THAT.

    THERE IS ONE CLEAR WINNER IN THIS WAR, HALLIBURTON AND OTHER PRIVATE CONTRACT FIRMS WHO FUNNELED BILLIONS OF DOLLARS, WITH THE HELP OF DICK CHENEY, FROM THE AMERICAN TAX PAYER.

    LAUTENBERG REPORT CHECK IT OUT.

    YES OBAMA DOES HAVE BIG LEAD AND IT WILL GET EVEN BIGGER BECAUSE McCAIN WANTS TO STAY IN IRAQ.

  • Posted By: likestothink55 @ 06/23/2008 5:24:22 PM

    Sounds like a great deal of neglect to me. If he neglects his wife so much at times of need, how will he neglect us when we need him? McCain is so much about HIS agenda and ego, that he fails to see others in this world.

    • Posted By: diena @ 06/23/2008 6:09:48 PM

      For your knowledge...Cindy MacCain herself said that she knew even before merrying her husband that He was merried to the Country...that the Country for him comes before, first! She knew it. She accepted him this way. It is good he is merried with my beloved Country...so I will surely vote for him

      President John Sidney MacCain....Vote is a must in 2008. Dont vote for Barrack Hussein Osama...he is playing as if he was a Messiah...he is yes, a Messy Islamic-Convert to christian thats not at all convincing.

      • Posted By: PReed1962 @ 06/29/2008 12:53:22 PM

        Ummm.... well she knew before marrying him he was already married. He did not "marry" his country until after they got married and he used her (and her families ties to AZ) to carpetbag his way into the Senate in my state. Boo hoo, I was a POW...SOWHAT! does that make you a good senator? I didn't buy that 25 years ago and I could see then it was nothing more than ambition and wealth that got him that seat. There are are were alot of old republicans in this State. Soon most of them will pass on- but we can't wait for that! I am 46 already! lol p.s. no womder this lady has laid low- she is not well liked around here.

      • Posted By: summer4077 @ 06/24/2008 10:01:45 AM

        Lol, typical uneducated Repub. Is your neck to the desired shade of crimson yet?

  • Posted By: abuela13 @ 06/28/2008 1:09:42 PM

    All I'd like to know is what do the McCain's have to hide, why don't they file taxes together like normal married couples, what do they have to hide. Think before you VOTE.

    • Posted By: RetiredMarine @ 06/29/2008 10:05:50 AM

      Well, if they had something to hide they probably would be trying to evade taxes altogether. Define your version of "Normal married couples" The last tax return I filled out did have the choice of filing "joinlty" or married filing seperately". So obviously there are a great deal of Americans who do not file jointly, otherwise the choice might not be there. There are many reasons for filing however you desire. Bottom line is that either way is well within the tax codes. What you are saying is that if someone files (or thinks) differently than you - that must be wrong. How about you THINK BEFORE YOU SPEAK

  • Posted By: cnrward@gmail.com @ 06/28/2008 1:55:14 PM

    to icanthinkformyself:
    Michelle Obama still said that for the first time in her ADULT LIFE, which Holly DID NOT quote correctly. So why don't you try corrected her before jumping on me. And if anybody's drinking anybody's "kool-aid" as you put it, it's probably you. Because isn't that something that the unhinged Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh says so frequently to their "ditto-head" listeners who like yourself, can't seem to think on their own? Just sayin'

    Believe me, I'm well informed on both sides, why don't you try doing the same. John McCain simply won't have the votes come November. Evangelicals are not excited about John McCain in the least. John McCain talks out of both sides of his mouth (recall his opposition to the G.I. Bill?) and his integrity leaves a lot to be desired.

    Barack Obama WILL be the next POTUS, I think people who are fighting so hard against that ought to start getting used to it.

    McCain tries to take credit for the G.I. Bill
    http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/06/27/what-does-mccain-mean-by-we/

    McCain flip-flops on a myriad of issues... take your pick
    http://youtube.com/results?search_query=mccain+flip+flop&page=1

    McCain is confused
    http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/chanelsblog/gG5Jx2

    See? I'm informed too.

    • Posted By: RetiredMarine @ 06/29/2008 10:01:44 AM

      If you are versed on both sides, why not break it down simply. Forget all the small issues out there. Forget the war, abortion, illegals issues as such and simply look at it as it is. One candidate wants a somewhat large government, but is more or less for freedom. The other candidate wants a huge government controlling nearly every aspect of your life. He wants the government making your decisions for you. Now granted neither candidate is great, but one is for American freedoms to persist while the other sounds more like the former Soviet Union. - There you have it. May not like the choice, both may be crap, but freedom over communism anyd ay!

    • Posted By: jimbo3800 @ 06/28/2008 2:02:41 PM

      You can think for yourself? With all those links to the left-wing websights de jour, you certainly could've fooled us!

      • Posted By: cnrward@gmail.com @ 06/28/2008 2:07:25 PM

        And where are your "diverse" links????

        Guaranteed that if you had any to offer, they would all be from the unhinged, full of spin and distortion right wing.

        Prove me wrong.

        • Posted By: jimbo3800 @ 06/29/2008 1:29:57 AM

          I don't do 'links'. Never have, never will.

        • Posted By: sharenews @ 06/28/2008 5:44:53 PM

          Right wing source or not, what is good for the gander is good for the other gander: :--D

          CONFUSED and CONFUSING:

          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6avos-ChZfY
          http://www.floppingaces.net/2008/05/29/obama-confused-and-confusing/

          OBAMA, CHANGE AGENT: Flip, Flop, bivity, bop

          http://www.audacityofhypocrisy.com/2008/06/25/dont-tell-me-words-dont-matter-obama-flip-flops-at-its-best/
          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ifEg1aq6Emo
          http://www.audacityofhypocrisy.com/2008/06/21/what-he-does-best-obama-flip-flops-on-nafta-again/

          GAFFES:
          http://www.audacityofhypocrisy.com/2008/05/22/obama-gaffes/
          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ap2Cg_FDRy4&NR=1

  • Posted By: Driver of wagons @ 06/28/2008 2:13:50 PM





    The Bushbot

    No matter the infraction, From "Brownie doing a heck of a job" to bypassing FISA court to illegally spy on U.S. citizens, the Bush administration, Repugnants and Conservatives alike can do no wrong in the eyes of the Bushbot This type will always seek to deflect criticism from Repugnants, no matter the issue.

    Ha Ha Ha Ho Ho Ho He He He

    instill even more PAIN with your vote for McCain



    • Posted By: RetiredMarine @ 06/29/2008 9:56:17 AM

      Again, the same "spying" was done under Clinton as it was under any other President, but once again you fail to mention that tid bit of information. The only thing new about anything you have mentioned is that Bush sought to have "authorization" for doing what had been done in the past. If anything - he brought it more out in the open.

  • Posted By: Driver of wagons @ 06/28/2008 2:26:56 PM





    Project for the New American Century. The organization, funded by foundations closely linked to the defense and energy industry, outlined their goals in their policy paper Rebuilding America's Defenses . Their plans for creating an American Empire, toppling regimes unfriendly to their corporate interests, creating an archipelago of military bases throughout the Middle East and Central Asia, control the internet, and militarize space all hinged upon one thing: According to this document (page 52). "The process of transformation," the plan said, "is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event - like a new Pearl Harbor." .

    Upon his appointment to President in 2000, George W. Bush appointed the hierarchy of this organization to the top levels of the White House, The Pentagon, and the State Department:

    Dick Cheney Vice President
    Donald Rumsfeld Secretary of Defense
    Douglas J. Feith (former) Undersecretary of Defense
    I. Lewis Libby Vice President Cheney's former Chief of Staff and Assistant to the Vice President for National Security Affairs.
    Aaron Friedberg Vice President Cheney's deputy National Security advisor
    Robert Zoelick US Deputy Secretary of State
    Paula Dobriansky Undersecretary of State
    Elliott Abrams Deputy National Security Adviser
    Frank Gaffney Pentagon's Defense Policy Board
    Fred C. Ikle Pentagon's Defense Policy Board
    Eliot A. Cohen Pentagon's Defense Policy Board
    Henry S. Rowen Pentagon's Defense Policy Board
    William J. Bennett Presidential speech writer
    Jeb Bush Governor of Florida
    Paul Wolfowitz World Bank President
    John Bolton Ambassador to the U.N.
    Zalmay Khalilzad U.S. ambassador to Iraq


    Want to know more? Read the Report!

    • Posted By: RetiredMarine @ 06/29/2008 9:54:15 AM

      Are you stupid or do you enjoy intentionally misleading everyone? These posts are normal postings by the President of the United States. I don't see you listing the appointments Clinton made to those same positions. If you are going to use things as a means of forwarding your own propoganda, then expect to be countered.

  • Posted By: bswhite56 @ 06/28/2008 2:30:12 PM

    NOW, WHY DO YOU THINK THAT THE DEMOCRATS ARE LYING ABOUT ANWR?

    REMEMBER WHEN AL GORE SAID THAT
    THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD WORK TO ARTIFICIALLY RAISE GAS PRICES
    TO $5.00 A GALLON?

    WELL.

    AL GORE AND HIS FELLOW DEMOCRATS HAVE ALMOST REACHED THEIR GOAL!

    NOW YOU KNOW THAT THE DEMOCRATS HAVE BEEN LYING. I've seen the pictures sent by those in Alaska. The area that they want to drill is barren land by the coast. It isn't even pretty. Yes, the interior of the Alaska wildlife refuge is, but not where they want to drill. We need to depend on ourselves and not Saudi Arabia.

    • Posted By: RetiredMarine @ 06/29/2008 9:51:19 AM

      From what I have heard it seems to be about 700 miles from any tree as well.
      As for the global warming and just about any other issue brought up, You can tell when a liberal is lying when their lips move

  • Posted By: wgoin @ 06/28/2008 3:00:24 PM

    To LovelyLife16: Maybe you should get your facts straight. John McCain drafted the immigration bill that is a pathway for all immigrants to become citizens of America without having to return to their native country or pay any penalty for being here illegally. That was not Barack Obama. And, McCain courted and pled for Rev. Hage's endorsement, knowing full well that he had said Katrina's destruction of New Orleans was God's wrath for AIDS, and other wonderful things. McCain also wanted the other Reverend's support (can't remember his name right now) that put down Jews.

    John McCain supports all the things for immigrants that you are attributing to Barack Obama. And, why wouldn't he? Arizona has one of the largest number of illegal immigrants in the country.

    And, while John McCain DID serve his country in Vietnam, he was not a hero - just a POW. And, like all POW's he suffered. But, he is no better than any other POW and is making sure more Americans die for a war in Iraq we should never have started.

    McCain voted against the Tax Cut for the Wealthy until he needed their votes and money. Now he votes for that same Tax Cut. He voted against offshore drilling because of the damage it does to the environment but, now that he wants big oil's support, he has changed his stance on that also.

    I would no more vote for John McCain than I would for you. Barack Obama is a great representative of this country who has the ability to use diplomacy to work through problems and help get American back to the country we should be. Oh, you should know that John McCain said he was not proud of his country until he served in the war. Obviously a stupid and unintentional statement - just like Michelle Obama. She clearly meant she was not proud of American politics until now. And, considering the moron who has run this country for the past 8 years - who is?

    • Posted By: RetiredMarine @ 06/29/2008 9:43:20 AM

      True that not all of McCains decisions have been great, but so far I agree with NONE of Obama's Ideas or decisions. He is an empty promises politician who gives good teleprompted speaches. That is his claim to fame.

      As for some of your comments - i.e. "he wasn't a hero - just a POW", well this stupid uneducated comment simply reaks of someone who has never served their country and has no clue. Anyone who has ever been a POW deserves respect - period. They have endured things you can never even imagine - all in the name of serving their country. So before you make lame a$$ comments like this, put what little bit of a brain you may have into action before engagint your mouth (or keyboard in this case). It must be real nice to sit in the comforts of your home and enjoy freedoms purchased by others and still be able to spout off at the mouth - disrespecting the very people who ensure your freedoms. I guess some people are simply ingrates throughout their entire lives.

      Next, Diplomacy will only take you so far. Even with diplomacy there comes a point where you have to take action. Do you not remember all the diplomatic solutions that were attempted to defuse the situation before we invaded (along with our allies). How many innocent lives were slain while we were negotiating diplomatically? Our diplomatic attempts didn't stop the attacks against our country. But I am sure you have conveniently forgotten about those deaths - they must be meaningless since they weren't actively fighting. Tell that to the people who lost loved ones.... Diplomacy without the willingness to use force if required is mearly weakness. To educate you... some of these countries do not respect weakness. It is in their culture. What has destroyed the US reputation of being a one time super power is the fact that we use "diplomacy" to the point of laughter. We are seen as a kiss up nation. What makes us a laughing stock is that when we are through kissing up and actally start to back up our desires, these countries watch our own people (liberals) blast their own country and fight for the enemy. Yeah... great diplomacy some of you like to represent.

  • Posted By: Driver of wagons @ 06/28/2008 7:13:12 PM




    Those who insinuate that the Republican party of Honest Abe's era is same party of today is a fool in their own skin. The party that Abraham Lincoln represented was the party of the people. The Republican party of today is the party of Corporate Socialism infested with charlatans, shysters, and a few other perverted mind sets on a free ride bought and paid for by the American tax payers and corporate lobbyist, To think, let alone speak of the Republican party of today in the same breath as Abraham Lincoln is not only blasphemy it's is stupid and UN-AMERICAN. And you really need to get over yourself. The World Has!

    Get a life and an education.

    Extend the never ending PAIN with your vote for McCain



    • Posted By: RetiredMarine @ 06/29/2008 9:23:07 AM

      You sure continue try to tie republicans to socialism, but from the philosophies I keep hearing from the Democrat side is more of a socialistic nature than anything I have heard from the republican side. Corporations are not the problem, our elected officials are the problem. Corporations produce items beneficial to the public - yes they are for making money, but isn't that how our country has grown? Politicians produce NOTHING of value for the country and only try to take from one group to give to another. Not exactly very heroic..... The ideas the democrats are pushing is lat of large government and control over everything. Perhaps you should go back and learn the tru definition of socialism because clearly by your post you have no clue.

    • Posted By: jimbo3800 @ 06/29/2008 12:52:25 AM

      Driver - Please define 'corporate socialism". Since corporations by definition thrive in a capitalist system, this makes zero sense. Corporations are the total antithesis of socialism, therefore 'corporate socialism' is an oxymoron.

  • Posted By: bswhite56 @ 06/28/2008 7:49:15 PM

    Well, of the six past presidents mentioned who were womanizers, four were Democrats!!! Thomas Jefferson was from the Democratic-Republican party and Warren Harding was Republican. Reagan is still the best of the recent presidents. :) He had great character.

    • Posted By: patmaryjazz @ 06/29/2008 8:10:17 AM

      Reagan had "great character," huh? He mayi have never been caught in an extra marital affair if that's what you mean - and it's highly unlikely that he never fooled around considering all his years in Hollywood and all the "leading ladys" he knew - but as to what really counts, see my reply of 6/28/08 at 14:40:12 to Floridave for a look at the real Ronald Reagan. If that's what you'd consider character, you need to do a little more studying. Remember how so many people mourned at Reagan's passing? The only thing I mourned was that he was ever president in the first place.

    • Posted By: Isabella38 @ 06/28/2008 10:35:24 PM

      The list is a lot longer than that. According to estimates, thirteen Presidents had affairs, all long before they took the oath of office. How about FDR, Eisenhower, and Wilson to name a few more. Then there are those who had/have aspirations to be President like Rudy Guiliani, Gary Hart, Robert Kennedy, Ted Kennedy, John McCain, and Jesse Jackson, all who had marital affairs. Newt Gingrich also comes to mind. There are just as many Republicans as there are Democrats who have had affairs, it has nothing to do with party affiliation.

      • Posted By: sharenews @ 06/28/2008 11:38:50 PM

        Yes, the list is MUCH longer. I just had to stop listing them cuz I had to take off for a dinner with friends in town. The point, anyway, is that when it comes to adultery many, many politicians including a good many of all our Presidents committed adultery. : - )

  • Posted By: lorenaweb1 @ 06/28/2008 11:03:21 AM

    It seems that there has not been a lot said about her until now, has she just been kind of pushed into the background?

    • Posted By: sharenews @ 06/29/2008 2:23:05 AM

      Focus in the primaries are usually on the actual resulting Primary nominees. Given that McCain was picked early in the game as the Republican nominee, focus was naturally shifted over to the two last remaining democratic nominees who ran tete-to-tete right until the very last primary. Usually, the spouses dont necessarily get discussed much in the primaries but in the democ. nom race in the primaries, the spouses of each candidate (Obama and Hillary) were both very vocal speaking out on the campaign trail. Thus, their spouses got the attention in the media moreso while McCain started to focus on moving into the GE mind set. Now that the focus is on just Obama vs. McCain, it is only natural that McCain and spouse would be drawn in by the media now; thus the (what I believe) was a great article that Newsweek did on this, what I believe, would be a fine First Lady (not saying Michelle wouldnt be, but I would love to see a lengthy article about her also in a Newsweek article...or have they or any other mag site done with?) I think I will google Michelle next.

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse