Whether you like his politics or not...Dude is a stud

**Don Quixote** · 05-10-2008

There's really no reason for me to rely upon McCain's war record to make my decision for Pres. What I now know about Obama is enough. So, no offense, RandomDude, you're a great guy, but .... what are you thinking? Are you crazy??

**Yonivore** · 05-10-2008

Originally Posted by Don Quixote

I happen know a few here at ST to speak of him as the Second Coming. Their estrogen levels e whenever one even dares to question him.

But you, as a reasonable and intelligent black Asian female, probably hang around reasonable people yourself. So it's no surprise that you've not met too many Obamaniacs. And I suspect that, proportionally speaking, the Obama cultists are few in number compared to the reasonable ones.

I actually stick to the "issues" when discussing his candidacy: his foreign and domestic agenda, his associations, and what he wants to do economically. I admit that I am a bit put off by his grand airy visions of a new post-partisan, post-racial era of politics,under the gasseous moniker of "change," when he has proven (thanks Hillary!

) to be anything but. And, as for his grand, government-driven ideas of peace and prosperity for all -- no thanks, not interested.

Well put, DQ.

**RandomGuy** · 05-10-2008

Originally Posted by Don Quixote

Yeah, let's not talk about doubtful things. Kerry's after-war record spoke all we need to know about him. I, anyway, didn't need the Swifties to tell me about Kerry's smear on the soldiers and sailors in Vietnam after he had come back. Shoot, the guy went in front of Congress and told them a bunch of hooey!

So, even if the Swifties were liars, it didn't make any difference to me. Let's line up what we know about Kerry (for instance) with what we know about McCain, and compare, and leave the veterans' groups out of it. Seems fair.

Around the swiftboat bit, I got into it with a Marine who was bashing Kerry for some of his tactics when he was in command of his boat during a firefight.

Kerry's boat came under RPG fire/ambush from the riverbank, and he turned his boat into the ambush, charged in and broke it up. The marine at first said this was a stupid thing to do.

Now, being an analytical sort, I looked at this tactically. The boat is about 5 times longer than it was wide. Meaning that if you turn towards the people who are firing at you, you are instantly a 5 times smaller target, AND you can bring to bear the big ass front turret machine guns.

This tactical improvisation was figured out after a few years of experience in Vietnam and Kerry had read about it, even though it wasn't official doctrine at the time.

He used some common sense over doing it "by the book" and, unsurprisingly it worked.

The marine was saying "it was against doctrine", he was undisciplined, etc, etc.

After he said this a couple of times, I asked him what he was trained to do tactically in case of his unit being ambushed.

US military training for infantry is that you don't sit in the freaking kill zone waiting to get your ass shot. You charge the ambushers as fast as possible to break up the ambush and get out of the prepared kill zone. At least that was what I was taught by the US army. I made the assumption, that later turned out to be correct, that the marine infantry doctrine was identical.

After I asked him that question he had nothing else to say.

like this has made me convinced that my policy of lmost never second guessing anyone, McCain, Kerry, or whoever, who was under fire for what they did under fire.

People should be given great leeway for decisions made in the heat of combat.

**Don Quixote** · 05-10-2008

Oh I agree. I never went after Kerry for what he did during his short time in Vietnam.

I, and most of my veterans friends, objected to his post-Vietnam behavior, smearing the conduct of the troops, throwing his medals over the wall, etc.

**Yonivore** · 05-10-2008

Originally Posted by RandomGuy

Around the swiftboat bit, I got into it with a Marine who was bashing Kerry for some of his tactics when he was in command of his boat during a firefight.

Kerry's boat came under RPG fire/ambush from the riverbank, and he turned his boat into the ambush, charged in and broke it up. The marine at first said this was a stupid thing to do.

Now, being an analytical sort, I looked at this tactically. The boat is about 5 times longer than it was wide. Meaning that if you turn towards the people who are firing at you, you are instantly a 5 times smaller target, AND you can bring to bear the big ass front turret machine guns.

This tactical improvisation was figured out after a few years of experience in Vietnam and Kerry had read about it, even though it wasn't official doctrine at the time.

He used some common sense over doing it "by the book" and, unsurprisingly it worked.

The marine was saying "it was against doctrine", he was undisciplined, etc, etc.

After he said this a couple of times, I asked him what he was trained to do tactically in case of his unit being ambushed.

US military training for infantry is that you don't sit in the freaking kill zone waiting to get your ass shot. You charge the ambushers as fast as possible to break up the ambush and get out of the prepared kill zone. At least that was what I was taught by the US army. I made the assumption, that later turned out to be correct, that the marine infantry doctrine was identical.

After I asked him that question he had nothing else to say.

like this has made me convinced that my policy of lmost never second guessing anyone, McCain, Kerry, or whoever, who was under fire for what they did under fire.

People should be given great leeway for decisions made in the heat of combat.

I question the veracity of that story and it's more about how he racked up his three Purple Hearts (two of which were over injuries that most men would ignore in the first place) and bugged out after being there only a few months.

Kerry is an opportunist. He asked for Swiftboat duty because he thought it was safe -- oops. After than, he spent his time trying to find a way to get the out. Can't blame him but, that doesn't make him any kind of hero.

**clambake** · 05-10-2008

we've since learned that deferment is safe.

**PlayoffEx-static** · 05-10-2008

I'm in the Chris Rock school on this: why should we entrust the future to McCain when he won't even be here?

**Aggie Hoopsfan** · 05-10-2008

Originally Posted by clambake

i like mccain, as a person and a patriot, but we don't need a guy that requires an education on a speech that he's in the middle of. his thoughts need constant correction. is there a pocket protector big enough for him to carry around little joe? if not, then lets get someone that won't accidentally step into traffic.

So you want to vote for a guy who works religiously on his soundbites, plays on his strength as an orator, but has no practical experience and has announced policy plans that would further bankrupt this country?

**Don Quixote** · 05-10-2008

Wow ... there's an argument we've never heard before.

The Republicans ... they're stupid. Eisenhower? Stupid. Reagan? Stupid, and senile. Bush I, stupid. Gingrich, stupid and evil. Bush II, really stupid and homicidal. McCain, stupid and loses his bearings. And the ones who vote for them are stupid, and cling to guns and religion.

The Democrats, though, are the smartest people since King Solomon. Stevenson was brilliant. JFK and RFK were child prodigies. McGovern, a great man. Mondale, very smart and stood up to Reagan. Dukakis, too smart to get elected. Bill Clinton, a genius. Al Gore, saved the environment, created the internet. Hillary, possibly the smartest women to ever walk the earth. And St. Barack ... wow ... just wow.

**ChumpDumper** · 05-10-2008

Eisenhower was very underrated as president. Reagan was getting senile in his second term and even tried to use it to cover his own ass in Iran-Contra. Bush I? Solid if unspectacular, very intelligent nonetheless. Gingrich? Outsmarted himself, better at getting power than actually wielding or holding it. Bush II? Horrible, horrible judgment. Just the worst.

For the Democrats these days -- Obama is the only one over whom you are obsessing, so I'll stick with him. There is no doubting his intelligence, but he is really green and probably not ready for the presidency all things considered. Given all that -- what does that say about the current Republican candidate and the latest Republican administration that has given an African-American dilettante a fighting chance at winning it all?

**Ignignokt** · 05-10-2008

Originally Posted by ChumpDumper

Eisenhower was very underrated as president. Reagan was getting senile in his second term and even tried to use it to cover his own ass in Iran-Contra. Bush I? Solid if unspectacular, very intelligent nonetheless. Gingrich? Outsmarted himself, better at getting power than actually wielding or holding it. Bush II? Horrible, horrible judgment. Just the worst.

For the Democrats these days -- Obama is the only one over whom you are obsessing, so I'll stick with him. There is no doubting his intelligence, but he is really green and probably not ready for the presidency all things considered. Given all that -- what does that say about the current Republican candidate and the latest Republican administration that has given an African-American dilettante a fighting chance at winning it all?

The current Repub candidate's stigma comes from the latter and not from his own capabilities. Obama has had favorable news coverage minus Rev Wright saga, so it's not hard to comprehend why he's seen as a strong opponent.

That said, people base his smarts on written speeches, when obama improvises like bush does, you see the same results. Now as to his administration capablities, he has none that we know.

I would like to see obama actually get tough debate questions, and have a debate.

Obama seemed to chicken for hillary. i'll pass.

**ChumpDumper** · 05-10-2008

Ah, the old "Blame the Media" fallback.

Sorry, the press loves McCain as much if not more than Obama. In fact if you are going to try to play that card, you have to admit that that was McCain's biggest advantage over his Republican compe ors and the reason he is the candidate. I don't think it's that big an influence, but if you do that's your business.

**ClingingMars** · 05-10-2008

Originally Posted by ChumpDumper

Ah, the old "Blame the Media" fallback.

Sorry, the press loves McCain as much if not more than Obama. In fact if you are going to try to play that card, you have to admit that that was McCain's biggest advantage over his Republican compe ors and the reason he is the candidate. I don't think it's that big an influence, but if you do that's your business.

the drive-bys love McCain because he is a moderate. but they still favor whoever's coming out of the Democratic primary.

- Mars

**Don Quixote** · 05-10-2008

Mars ... you are quoting the trolls again. Haven't we gone over this?

But, since it's out there ... there is no way that the MSM, despite their basic respect for McCain, doesn't campaign actively for the D-nominee this fall. None. They turned on Hillary when the Chosen One emerged, and they will abandon their cordial treatment of McCain when the general election rolls around. Count on it.

**ChumpDumper** · 05-10-2008

So you have a built-in excuse for the fall.

I can always count on that.

**Yonivore** · 05-10-2008

Originally Posted by ChumpDumper

There is no doubting his [Obama's] intelligence,...

I'm sorry, anyone who is a chain-smoker this day and age; I doubt their intelligence.

That right there is a non-partisan statement. If you smoke, you are a ing idiot.

**ChumpDumper** · 05-10-2008

Originally Posted by Yonivore

I'm sorry, anyone who is a chain-smoker this day and age; I doubt their intelligence.

That right there is a non-partisan statement. If you smoke, you are a ing idiot.

You'd find a way to accept it if he was Republican, just like a good partisan would.

**Yonivore** · 05-10-2008

Originally Posted by ChumpDumper

You'd find a way to accept it if he was Republican, just like a good partisan would.

No, you'd be wrong.

**Wild Cobra** · 05-10-2008

Originally Posted by ChumpDumper

Ah, the old "Blame the Media" fallback.

Sorry, the press loves McCain as much if not more than Obama. In fact if you are going to try to play that card, you have to admit that that was McCain's biggest advantage over his Republican compe ors and the reason he is the candidate. I don't think it's that big an influence, but if you do that's your business.

Remember you said that when the media becomes accomplices in McCain bashing... It will happen once the primary process is over. Mark my words!