McCain vs Hillary = McCain

McCain vs Obama = Obama

Romney vs Hillary = Third party

Years, BLT.

.

"Forgive" ain't a word in the Republican dictionary.  Unless you're talking felony convictions.

Robb, Meatloaf once said in a rather good song that Two out of Three Ain't Bad.  But in the case of you and me finding common ground, I'll take it a step further: One out of three ain't bad :)

Well, random, then we must be the forgiveness role models, and hopefully, maybe a few we follow in our footsteps.

My personal ranking are

1. Obama
2. HRC
3. Bloomberg (independent)
4. McCain

I really question have someone who is past 70 in the whitehouse. I believe we need someone younger, who can handle the stress.

The first prerequisite for forgiveness is repentance.  And McCain will keep us in Iraq until the country is dead. 

Hated Meatloaf's Two Out Of Three Aint Bad. Here he is at his best: Hot Patootie

What's difference? I see higher taxes, police state expansion, more welfare (corporate and personal), more endless wars and amnesty for illegals across the board while ignoring, if even understanding in the first place, the actual economic and personal civil liberties issues entirely. Just put a different name on it, doesn't change the outcome. But it feels good to be on the winning "team", I suppose?

I really question have someone who is past 70 in the whitehouse. I believe we need someone younger, who can handle the stress.
 

McCain's VP pick could swing my vote on account of his age. With the Supreme Court  teetering on the brink of overturning Roe vs Wade, if he picks Huckabee, I'll pass.

What's difference? I see higher taxes, police state expansion, more welfare (corporate and personal), more endless wars and amnesty for illegals across the board while ignoring, if even understanding in the first place, the actual economic and personal civil liberties issues entirely. Just put a different name on it, doesn't change the outcome. But it feels good to be on the winning "team", I suppose?

So, let me get this straight: You will just as easily cast a vote for Hillary, or avoid the polls and allow her to win by default?

And for those who say McCain's too old, think of it as wisdom adding grace to vitality. 

McCain needs to stop pretending that he doesn't know what Juan Hernandez - his head of Hispanic outreach - has been involved in for the past several years. A woman very politely asked McCain why he would have an open borders advocate who encourages illegal aliens to steal Social Security Numbers for his head of outreach, and McCain - in an irritated voice - claimed that he didn't know what she was talking about. Could McCain possibly be that ignorant? Or is he lying?

http://www.youtube.com/watc... Concerned voter

http://www.youtube.com/watc... Hernandez montage

Juan Hernandez transparently refers to everyone as "my friend," not unlike a used car salesman trying to sell you or I an AMC Pacer. Hernandez acts like the type who would shake your hand with his right hand while stealing your watch with his left, and who would keep smiling throughout the entire thing.

So, let me get this straight: You will just as easily cast a vote for Hillary, or avoid the polls and allow her to win by default?

No, I'll do the American thing and vote for someone who actually represents my views. Anything else is absurd. Besides, as I said, Hillary=McCain. Who cares if it's her or him? They share nearly every stance. Not to mention, most of Congress is Democrat, if you believe the fairy tale, so not much changes. Or they get ousted as well, then you get even more, more of the same. Again, rather than dodge and put words in my mouth, give some reason, besides a capital "R" why anyone should avoid Hillary in favor of McCain?

Yes, McCain could be that ignorant.  Time and again he has said he doesn't know what his policy is on particular issues (until it's handed to him.)  He's truly another Reagan or Bush--a figurehead who mouths words he does not understand.

Juan Hernandez, ugh! Ever see that guy on O'Reilly? No wonder McCain has a crazy immigration policy if Juan is in his ear.

Again, rather than dodge and put words in my mouth, give some reason, besides a capital "R" why anyone should avoid Hillary in favor of McCain?

I'm not suggesting that McCain is everything I hope he would be.  But who would you prefer as the Republican candidate?  The problem with the selection this time around is that it's been very difficult to get everything in one candidate---good or bad.  The strengths and weaknesses seemed equally distributed. 

McCain would command more respect internationally than Hillary, he wouldn't come with the same "Clinton" baggage, he is conservative on a number of social issues, and he is not as polarizing a figure as Bush has been.  Most crucial of all, he's not Hillary. 

So, basically it's a personal thing? I'm supposed to like the guy, and not like Hillary? McCain is most definitely as polarizing as Bush, at least in the Republican party. He runs on nearly an identical platform.  Most people actually prefer the Clinton baggage. For whatever reason, Bill was a popular President. I don't vote based on whom I like. Ron Paul, for example, is Conservative on almost every issue, and Constitutional on all of them. I don't need everything from a candidate, but McCain has nothing. Hillary has nothing. In fact, nobody except Ron Paul brings anything new to the table, and simply continues the status quo. I for one refuse to participate in this pageant. I don't vote because "he's going to win" or "anybody but her". Besides, social issues shouldn't even be handled by the Federal Government at all. And that is the only place they differ. Abortion, legal marijuana, gay marriage, all sideline issues. McCain has no answer to the economy, because he has no understanding. No answer to the war. No answer to the spending. No answer to Foreign policy, nor domestic policy. No answer to trade. No answers to anything. Hillary at least says something about all of that, although wrong and usually lying about most of it.

Bush kept listening to Rumsfeld's failed strategy in Iraq while McCain was openly expressing his preference for a surge, and his preference for getting rid of Rumsfeld.  Bush finally got it, and altered the whole strategy in Iraq. 

Since Rumsfeld was replaced by General Petraeus and since Petraeus has taken over, the improvements in Iraq, in terms of security, have been dramatic.  I don't agree that Bush was/is a total failure, but if McCain would have been President, maybe we could have seen this much success in Iraq much sooner. 

And even more Iraqis would be dead, more soldiers would be on their 3rd/4th/5th tour, and we still would have already declared victory long ago, assuming starting the war was justified to begin with? I don't see how that's success? They say they're after Al Qaeda but then they say Al Qaeda is Iran, which is a blatant lie anyway, so which is it? Not to mention, Rumsfiled was a Secretary of Defense, Petraeus is a General...

McCain doesn't want this to end anytime soon, he's openly said 100 years or forever, "whatever it takes"? Whatever what takes? What's the goal? Bankruptcy? That's coming a lot sooner than 100 years. So to that end, again, Hillary is every bit as viable a candidate, as she as well, sees no end to this war.

Juan Hernandez, ugh! Ever see that guy on O'Reilly? No wonder McCain has a crazy immigration policy if Juan is in his ear.

Here's our hero in a well-airbrushed photo

A review of his book:

"This is one of the most poorly written books that I have ever read. It was not well thought out or researched at all. I am an American of Mexican descent, so I read it with with a very open mind. Senor Hernandez is in la-la land. He does not have a clue. Nothing he says makes a lick of sense."

Here's Hernandez on Scarborough Country shortly after the "Day Without A Mexican" fiasco of 2006:

JUAN HERNANDEZ, FORMER ADVISER TO VICENTE FOX: Well, my friend, I think the message is not just to the Democrats and to the Republicans, but it‘s to the entire United States. This is a day that is going to be remembered as a very important day. The giant has awakened. It is a giant that is saying, as you just showed, America, will you marry me? America, I want to pay taxes. America, I‘m already a good U.S. citizen. Give me the document to prove it to you.

Not to mention, Rumsfiled was a Secretary of Defense, Petraeus is a General...

Excuse me, I suppose Gates, as Rumsfeld's replacement does deserve more credit than I gave him.  But the whole team deserves credit, and the changing of the guard was something McCain supported all along.

 A significant and consistent drop in the death rate in Iraq seems like, at the very least, a modicum of success to me.  Wasn't December, 2007, the least deadly month in Iraq since February of 2004?  What will it take for you to see the light at the end of the tunnel?  If you've got tunnel vision, and all you see is failure, then I'm wasting my time arguing with you. 

OK, I'll listen: How is fewer people dying in Iraq a success, as opposed to more people dying? And then, what justification does this Government have for building permanent bases there? And Dec. 07 being the least deadly, in a year that is the most deadly, is hardly noteworthy. What light are you talking about? Basically, what is victory in Iraq? When does it end? Where is the end of the tunnel? The entire war is the problem, and nobody seems to want to end it. Or perhaps I haven't heard the proper argument, and saying that fewer people died in December 07 isn't going to cut it, if you're really trying to convince anyone to vote for another warmongering politician instead of a different female one.

 Well, johnbravo6, I appreciate your perspective, but things are too complicated to just pull out of Iraq in an abrupt fashion.  I'm not saying it should be dragged out either.  There is no easy solution.  I would favor John McCain over Hillary on the handling of the war, but after tonight's abysmal performance in the debates, I'm beginning to have some serious doubts about whether or not his momentum will hold.