The Real McCain

[diamond]

Originally posted by Diemen


Prior to his presidency Clinton was certainly not synonymous with dirty. .

Wrong his dirtiness was contained in a backward southern state.

He proved his slimeiness and she hers on a national level shortly after gaining the White House.

<>

[diamond]

Originally posted by MrsSpringsteen


You constantly mentioned McCain's temperament and anger when Mitt was still in it, but now you're downplaying it?

It was in the context against who he was running against.

McCain is like Mother Theresa compared to Hillary.



<>

[yolland]

He's not running against anyone yet.

[diamond]

Yolland-


GOP Primaries.

That said, as soon as McCain annoucnes Mitt as his running mate, the GOP ticket will then become sanitized.

<>

[MrsSpringsteen]

Originally posted by diamond

McCain is like Mother Theresa compared to Hillary.

If you say so

And we all know you have no biases against Hillary. The NY Times article I posted about gender and race in that thread below makes me think of the/your perceived difference in "temperament" between Sen McCain and Sen Clinton.

[diamond]

[MrsSpringsteen]

Well written post?

[Diemen]

Originally posted by diamond
McCain is like Mother Theresa compared to Hillary.

Funny, back when Mitt was still in the race I could've sworn I remember you posting that you'd vote for Hillary before McCain.

edit: I remembered wrong.

http://forum.interference.com/showth...in#post4916350

You said you'd vote for Obama over McCain. Interesting.

[Bluer White]

Temperament is a big factor when I vote for a president.

McCain's reputation makes me uneasy.

[AngelofHarlem01]

Yikes, if little things like that send him off..

[diamond]

Originally posted by Diemen


Funny, back when Mitt was still in the race I could've sworn I remember you posting that you'd vote for Hillary before McCain.

edit: I remembered wrong.

http://forum.interference.com/showth...in#post4916350

You said you'd vote for Obama over McCain. Interesting.

Gets your facts right fellar-integrity was the issue at hand.

<>

[CTU2fan]

So that's why Ann Coulter won't vote for him...

[Strongbow]

Originally posted by U2387




1.)War hero- there are plenty of those in public life- Jack Murtha, Chuck Hagel, Jim Webb, Bob Kerrey, John Kerry, Bob Dole, the list goes on.

John McCain's military service did not begin nor end with the Vietnam war or a single war unlike most of the people you mention above. John McCain served on active duty in the United States military from 1958 to 1981, 23 years of service on active duty. He reached the rank of Captain in the Navy which is the equivalent of a Colonel in the Army or Marine Corp, O6. He has more active duty military service than all of the people you list above, combined. John McCain's has more years of active military service than any President in US history with the exception of Zachary Taylor and Eisenhower.

John McCain's extensive military service to the United States is NOT a mere footnote nor is it simply about his time as a POW during the Vietnam War. He is the most experienced person on the US military and national security in government today. He has over 50 years of uninterrupted service and experience on these issues.

[Diemen]

Originally posted by Strongbow
John McCain's has more years of active military service than any President in US history with the exception of Zachary Taylor and Eisenhower.

Ok. So he's got the most military experience. Doesn't make him a great leader. Doesn't mean he'll make the best decisions in war either, as is evidenced by his positions re: Iraq and Iran.

[Strongbow]

Originally posted by Diemen


Ok. So he's got the most military experience. Doesn't make him a great leader. Doesn't mean he'll make the best decisions in war either, as is evidenced by his positions re: Iraq and Iran.

One does not reach the rank of Captain in the Navy by being a poor leader. He was an officer for 23 years! John McCain is someone you go to in order to learn about leadership. On Iraq, he understood that the world would be safer by removing Saddam from power. Obama foolishly believes that the world would be safer with Saddam in power. McCain understands that in order to achieve stability in Iraq, the United States military must remain in Iraq and only withdraw when conditions on the ground warrent such a withdrawal. Instead of basing US security policy in Iraq on conditions on the ground and what is important to US interest in the region, Hillary and Obama base their decisions on domestic politics that would benefit them in the elections.

[joyfulgirl]

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/20...nder_in_chief/

McCain draws mixed reviews among military leaders, and they expressed serious doubts about whether McCain has the right temperament to be the next president and commander in chief. Some expressed more confidence in Obama, citing his temperament as an asset.

It is not difficult in Washington to find high-level military officials who have had close encounters with John McCain's temper, and who find it worrisome. Politicians sometimes scream for effect, but the concern is that McCain has, at times, come across as out of control. It It is difficult to find current or former officers willing to describe those encounters in detail on the record. That's because, by and large, those officers admire McCain. But that doesn't mean they want his finger on the proverbial button, and they are supporting Clinton or Obama instead.

"I like McCain. I respect McCain. But I am a little worried by his knee-jerk response factor," said retired Maj. Gen. Paul Eaton, who was in charge of training the Iraqi military from 2003 to 2004 and is now campaigning for Clinton. "I think it is a little scary. I think this guy's first reactions are not necessarily the best reactions. I believe that he acts on impulse."

"I studied leadership for a long time during 32 years in the military," said retired Air Force Maj. Gen. Scott Gration, a one-time Republican who is supporting Obama. "It is all about character. Who can motivate willing followers? Who has the vision? Who can inspire people?" Gration asked. "I have tremendous respect for John McCain, but I would not follow him."

"One of the things the senior military would like to see when they go visit the president is a kind of consistency, a kind of reliability," explained retired Gen. Merrill McPeak, a former Republican, former chief of staff of the Air Force and former fighter pilot who flew 285 combat missions. McPeak said his perception is that Obama is "not that up when he is up and not that down when he is down. He is kind of a steady Eddie. This is a very important feature," McPeak said. On the other hand, he said, "McCain has got a reputation for being a little volatile." McPeak is campaigning for Obama.

Stephen Wayne, a political science professor at Georgetown who is studying the personalities of the presidential candidates, agrees McCain's temperament is of real concern. "The anger is there," Wayne said. If McCain is the one to answer the phone at 3 a.m., he said, "you worry about an initial emotive, less rational response."

[U2387]

Originally posted by Strongbow


John McCain's military service did not begin nor end with the Vietnam war or a single war unlike most of the people you mention above. John McCain served on active duty in the United States military from 1958 to 1981, 23 years of service on active duty. He reached the rank of Captain in the Navy which is the equivalent of a Colonel in the Army or Marine Corp, O6. He has more active duty military service than all of the people you list above, combined. John McCain's has more years of active military service than any President in US history with the exception of Zachary Taylor and Eisenhower.

John McCain's extensive military service to the United States is NOT a mere footnote nor is it simply about his time as a POW during the Vietnam War. He is the most experienced person on the US military and national security in government today. He has over 50 years of uninterrupted service and experience on these issues.

I did not mean to suggest it was a footnote. Murtha served from 1952 to 1990 when he retired from the Navy Reserves, significantly longer than McCain. He is more widely associated with generals and the military leadership structure than any public servant, McCain included. Thats why it was such a big deal when he came out against Iraq in 2005. People on the hill and in the punditry understood that Jack Murtha often is the mouthpiece of the military on vital issues decided by mere civilians. National security policy, McCain is far from the most or accomplished experienced- Joe Biden, John Warner, Dick Lugar, now retired and possible VP candidate Sam Nunn, Ike Skelton, Rush Holt -all are more knowledgable and respected in these circles than McCain. Perhaps the most accomplished people on this issue in America are retired public servants: Gary Hart, Warren Rudman, Lee Hamilton, Jim Baker, Richard Clarke, the list goes on for people more in tune w/ national security policy than McCain. Many in public life have served and served for a long time (Patrick Murphy, Joe Sestak as well) lets just admire them all regardless of party and look at the policies. Your evaluation: McCain would be a good leader and a good president- Mine: the opposite. Thats fine, we disagree, thats what this country is all about, we vote for who we want.

[U2387]

Originally posted by diamond


big D-

Look up proportionality in the dictionary.

Clintons are synonymous with dirty, John McCain isn't.

<>

Clintons are synonymous with dirty for one reason and one reason only: the Republican congress spent MILLIONS, no WASTED millions on meaningless personal investigations of the Clintons that got them media attention and fueled the perception, but ULTIMATELY TURNED UP NOTHING. Lets review:
1.)Whitewater- no wrongdoing found
2.)Vince Foster- all BS
3.)Travelgate-nothing there
4.)Ken Starr hit job- not a single allegation of any wrongdoing proved. (dont hit me with lying under oath, he never should have been before such a kangaroo political hit team court to answer questions about having sex w/ another consenting adult for no money, favors, etc. He did nothing illegal.

In other words, Republicans are 0 for a lifetime in going after the Clintons. But the media will report on their attempts to smear him (who doesnt love a good, juicy sex story, true or not) and idiots in America will swallow it hook, line and sinker. The Republicans have been smart to pick up on this, I give them credit there.

Then they sit by and watch Bush squander $1.8 trillion in Iraq, $200 billion in no bid contracts each yr there. Not to mention the $700 billion Medicare disaster in 2003. I could go on. They say nothing when he puts incompetent cronies in charge of FEMA or the State Department or HUD, say nothing when he outs a covert CIA agent(highly illegal) or when he warantless wiretaps. Who is dirty now, self made man Clinton, or this pathologically lying spoiled rotten brat who has done nothing in his life but run businesses that have been handed to him right into the ground and then do the exact same thing w/ the country?

To think, all because the Republicans could not get over Daddy Bush losing in 1992!!

[Strongbow]

Originally posted by U2387


I did not mean to suggest it was a footnote. Murtha served from 1952 to 1990 when he retired from the Navy Reserves, significantly longer than McCain. He is more widely associated with generals and the military leadership structure than any public servant, McCain included. Thats why it was such a big deal when he came out against Iraq in 2005. People on the hill and in the punditry understood that Jack Murtha often is the mouthpiece of the military on vital issues decided by mere civilians. National security policy, McCain is far from the most or accomplished experienced- Joe Biden, John Warner, Dick Lugar, now retired and possible VP candidate Sam Nunn, Ike Skelton, Rush Holt -all are more knowledgable and respected in these circles than McCain. Perhaps the most accomplished people on this issue in America are retired public servants: Gary Hart, Warren Rudman, Lee Hamilton, Jim Baker, Richard Clarke, the list goes on for people more in tune w/ national security policy than McCain. Many in public life have served and served for a long time (Patrick Murphy, Joe Sestak as well) lets just admire them all regardless of party and look at the policies. Your evaluation: McCain would be a good leader and a good president- Mine: the opposite. Thats fine, we disagree, thats what this country is all about, we vote for who we want.

I said ACTIVE MILITARY SERVICE! Murtha was in the reserves for most of his time in the military. He is a House Representitive and far from being as well known with most of the military as McCain.

Joe Biden, John Warner, Dick Lugar, Sam Nunn, Ike Skelton, Rush Holt don't have the 50+ years of experience that John McCain has on National Security. Sam Nunn and Joe Biden voted AGAINST the 1991 Gulf War to remove Saddam's military forces from Kuwait. EVEN the French sent troops, a light armored division, to help remove Saddam from Kuwait in 1991, but Sam Nunn, Joe Biden, John Kerry, and the vast majority of Democrats voted against it. Sorry but Gary Hart, Lee Hamilton and many of the others you mentioned are not on par or ahead of McCain on these issues nor are they as well respected.

[Strongbow]

Originally posted by U2387

Who is dirty now, self made man Clinton, or this pathologically lying spoiled rotten brat who has done nothing in his life but run businesses that have been handed to him right into the ground and then do the exact same thing w/ the country?

Well, most Americans did not feel that way which is why Bush is a two term President with his party having controlled congress for most of his time in office.