Originally Posted By WilliamK99 It's true, while I disagree with about 50% of his ideas, I do agree with the fact that he wants to cut and run from Iraq. Hearing McCain talk about being here for the long haul, made me realize that there would be no end to this war if he got elected. With Obama, there is a 25% chance that he might be telling the truth and will get us out of Iraq quickly. So yes, I reluctantly will support Obama for the 2008 election.
Originally Posted By JohnS1 Too bad you feel that way, just as things seem to be getting under some control over there. I sincerely doubt Obama would be able to just snap his fingers and get us out anyway. And if hew did, just watch the terrorist cells in this country become emboldened and start creating havoc in our own country. I agree that pulling out seems so simple, so ideal a solution, but my fear is that it will cause more death and destruction than we have seen yet.
Originally Posted By X-san I'm actually just stunned at the sheer number of people ON LAUGHINGPLACE ALONE who are even considering supporting McCain. It isn't even about McCain, folks. Look at what HIS party has done to America in the past eight years. If they are not collectively punished, severely, in the next election, things will only get worse.
Originally Posted By WilliamK99 I agree that pulling out seems so simple, so ideal a solution, but my fear is that it will cause more death and destruction than we have seen yet.<< I look at it this way...We cut and run, I figure it'll take 2 to 3 years... All hell breaks loose in Iraq, and guess what... It's not our problem anymore, it becomes a UN issue, using UN funds.....
Originally Posted By Darkbeer But who provides the vast majority of UN funding... The USA! And how many scandals have the UN been involved in lately, talk about a body that isn't worth trusting! At last John McCain has experience, something Barack Obama is seriously lacking in. 22 years in the Navy, 20 years in the Senate. John McCain won't ruin the economy by raising taxes and making a bigger government. The country NEEDS to strengthen the dollar, and that means cutting government red tape and regulations, and allow companies to hire more workers and produce products the world wants. No I agree with every stance that John McCain talks about, NO! But I agree with him a lot more than I do Barack Obama, and why, if the election was held today, would be happy to mark the box by John McCain's name. But there is also a lot of things to happen, including Vice Presidential nominations, any third-party possibilities, and information released by all the candidates that could change my mind before November.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>John McCain won't ruin the economy by raising taxes and making a bigger government.<< But you said the same thing about George W. Bush, and goverment spending is in the stratosphere. This ancient myth that Republicans are any better at controlling government spending is a hoot.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan And the government had a HUGE expansion under the watchful eye of George W. Bush AND the GOP controlled house and senate. But, yeah, they're the "small government" people. Puh-lease.
Originally Posted By WilliamK99 What brought about this change is I am taking a class online where I had to do an essay on the "Cost of the War" in financial, human loss, and loss of respect our Nation has gotten from other nations.... When you get down and dirty in numbers and facts, and you keep on seeing the same things, with no spin present, things start to become a whole lot clearer...
Originally Posted By DlandDug >>Hearing McCain talk about being here for the long haul...<< But have you actually listened to what he has said? Or are you relying on the heavily edited comments which have been used for political advantage by his opponents? The initial statement was in the midst of an exchange at a Town Hall meeting in Derry, New Hampshire. The issue was whether America should cut and run. McCain's view is that we should take our troops out of harm's way, but that we would not be surprised if we maintain a presence much longer-- even 100 years. <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VFknKVjuyNk" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...nKVjuyNk</a> McCain clarified this later, pointing out other parts of the world where we have maintained troops for 50 or 60 years without any protest from the public, and have rather contributed to peace and stability. <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rJWoGulgbec&feature=related" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...=related</a> McCain has been in war, and has never shown an eagerness to enter war. His comments on this have been taken out of context.
Originally Posted By Elderp I don't know who I will be voting for but it wont be the Republican party.
Originally Posted By WilliamK99 George W Bush is hoping to add the destruction of the Republican Party to his long list of accomplishments.
Originally Posted By DyGDisney WK99 -- this is shocking coming from you. I thought you supported the Iraqi occupation.
Originally Posted By WilliamK99 I do support it, but there comes a time when continued deployments eat away at the morale of the troops. Now, in additional news, McCain refused to vote on the new GI Bill, while Obama and Clinton both supported it. <a href="http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/05/23/mccain_misses_vote_on_a_new_gi_bill_scorns_criticism_from_obama/" target="_blank">http://www.boston.com/news/nat...m_obama/</a> This Bill, which would increase substantially the benefits soldiers get, is being threatened with a Presidential veto, but enough Republicans have defected that it should be able to override the veto. This is good news for all in the military, it's just too bad John McCain didn't see fit to vote yes or no, he abstained instead....
Originally Posted By SuperDry <<< This Bill, which would increase substantially the benefits soldiers get, is being threatened with a Presidential veto >>> And it really shows where President Bush's priorities are. He's all for "supporting the troops" when sending them into battle, but when it comes to helping them out once they return, not so much.
Originally Posted By X-san ***I don't know who I will be voting for but it wont be the Republican party.*** That's the spirit! Seriously though, the Republicans AS A GROUP have done something very harmful to the U.S., and that is letting the far right wing religious nuts get control of their own selection process. Granted, they are ATTEMPTING to moderate this time around, but it's too little too late. They need to be punished severely by the American electorate THIS TIME, so that maybe they can slink back to where they came from and really, truly examine the damage they've done to America. Perhaps then, after several years, we can see a re-emergence of the real "Grand Old Party" which will never again screw up their selection process and the general election process enough to allow what happened to ever happen again. If you vote Republican THIS time (especially for those of you that voted in W twice), it's truly a shame on you. Because they need to be sent a message.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>Now, in additional news, McCain refused to vote on the new GI Bill, while Obama and Clinton both supported it.<< Yes, that's lovely, isn't it? Clearly, some people believe "supporting teh troops" means sticking a magnetic yellow ribbon on a car, not actually offering increased benefits for their valuable service to this country. Many Republicans did, in fact, support that bill. But others, it seems, suddenly want to tighten their belts at the expense of the men and women actually doing the hard work. Just unbelievable.
Originally Posted By Darkbeer There was major flaws in the GI bill that Senator Webb proposed... <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,357664,00.html" target="_blank">http://www.foxnews.com/story/0...,00.html</a> >>HEMMER: Well, here's what Senator Obama is saying. He says, "Senator McCain thinks this bill is too generous to veterans." How do you react to something like that? DONATELLI: Well, there's two points about that. Number one, as has been discussed, the Congressional Budget Office does say that the Webb bill would really harm retention rates, and at a time when we desperately need skilled military, that wouldn't be a good thing. And then, the second thing is that the Webb bill is just as generous to veterans with a minimal amount of service than with somebody that, say, who's been in for 20 years. The McCain bill, the bill that McCain backs has a sliding scale. So, look, there's two ways to do this. McCain just felt like that his proposal was the better way to go, was more affordable, and it certainly wasn't political posturing.<< He voted against the Webb proposed bill, becuase he preferred a different version of the bill. Not that he was against expanding education benefits for GI's.
Originally Posted By X-san I thought he didn't vote against, but abstained? If he'd voted AGAINST, and cited those reasons, I could understand the issue better. Abstaining, to me, is always political. CYA and all that.
Originally Posted By fkurucz <<Too bad you feel that way, just as things seem to be getting under some control over there.>> If that is true then we should be able to leave soon, right? Or is our presence required to keep the peace? Here is a real sign of the times: my brother, a staunch Republican and Protestant Fundamentalist is going to vote for Obama.
