100 years?

Daniel, NY — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 21:24:07 GMT

3 polls from blue states (MI, NJ and WA) were released today and McCain leads 5 out of 6 match-ups in them -- a clear indication of how formidable he might be in the fall. Full roundup: http://www.campaigndiaries.com/2008/03/monday-polls-mccain-edges-democrats-in.html

100 years?

jose, ny, ny — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 21:26:01 GMT

Wait -- It's ok for us to see a 10 second clip of McCain on YouTube, but it's not ok to see 30 second clip of Rev. Wright on YouTube?

Obama, make up your mind.

100 years?

scott — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 21:27:52 GMT

"Truth Hurts,"
Regarding your response to my comments about Hillary not really being vetted, I appreciate the response. However, I'll say it again. Just because you, Hillary, Bill, and Howard Wolfson say she's been fully vetted doesn't mean that it's true. We've unfortunately found that out the past 2 months. Her claims about Bosnia that she's been making for 3 months are not misspeaking. They're lies. She brought her ONLY child into sniper fire? Huh? Her role in SCHIP? Greatly exaggerated. Her role in Northern Ireland? Greatly exaggerated.

But, because you believe strongly in your position, precisely what are the 3 things that Hillary Clinton has accomplished in domestic policy and foreign policy that give her this vaunted experience? And please don't respond by saying "well, what has Obama done." HIllary Clinton is the one running on this deep background of experience. I've moved to support Obama in part because she has been so arrogant in her resume buffing. Senator Clinton always talks about being judged on her resume ("we're hiring the President of the United States here..."). If somebody walked into my office to interview and I later found out that at least one of the 3 biggest things they had claimed was a lie, I MOST CERTAINLY would not hire them. I dare say you would do likewise.

100 years?

Kris STL — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 21:30:06 GMT

Teh long and the short of it is McCain has no exit strategy. HE thinks the war is winnable. He is not open to what he considers defeat. Also he needs to know that the insurgents do not want us there at all. Not even for peace keeping. And as long as we are there, there will be bloodshed.

100 years?

Jason — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 21:30:14 GMT

To Domenico:

Obama's top national security advisor General McPeak said we could be in Iraq for a century. He compared it to South Korea.

Why doesn't the media question Obama about this apparent hypocracy. McPeak gave the interview to the Oregonian and Obama still made him his co-chairman of his campaign.

Charles Krautheimer was the only one to bring this hypocracy up.

McCain has said he will turn over areas to the Iraqis and bring our troops home. McCain said it will be up to the Iraqis to deal with the insurgency and be on the front lines. McCain was talking about providing air cover. McCain was also talking about training iraqi forces.

100 years?

Laura Martinez — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 21:35:38 GMT

Meanwhile can Obama respond to these? http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZGVkY2NhYTkzZjIyYzRkYTIxNTU3MjBiMDVmZmE2Y2Y=

100 years?

axt113, clevelan, oh — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 21:39:46 GMT

Hey RNC troops are being killed right now, doesn't that mean we should leave?

100 years?

Paul, Riverside, CA — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 21:40:14 GMT

Jose, ny, ny.

You missed this one buddy!

Rev. Wright is not running for President, McCain is. Also, Clinton has used the same arguement about McCain and his "100 years" statement quite a few times.

100 years?

twocanpete — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 21:41:02 GMT

http://twocanpete.blogspot.com/
The only thing that matters is that they are there and they need to come home now. We are pouring $720 million a day down that sandy rat hole and sea of American blood. Enough is Enough, not one more day.

100 years?

laughaday — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 21:41:23 GMT

I'm so over Iraq being compared to Korea and Japan in terms of occupation......I'd surely love it to be so.........we sure in the Hell do not have daily death, destruction, maiming and misery in Tokyo and Seoul like we do in Baghdad.

100 years?

Tim, Mobile — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 21:43:38 GMT

"as long as Americans are not being injured or harmed or wounded or killed. … It's fine with me and I hope it would be fine with you if we maintained a presence in a very volatile part of the world."

"as long as Americans are not being injured or harmed or wounded or killed. … It's fine with me and I hope it would be fine with you if we maintained a presence in a very volatile part of the world."

All of those posters who keep going with the "100 years, McCain said 100 years," FirstRead has finally DONE YOUR HOMEWORK FOR YOU.

Now find something else, for Pete's sake. And if you start with the "Iran next" crap, then have your constitutional expert Obama explain to you that a President can't go to war without congressional approval.

The point is, if a conventional war breaks out somewhere in the world, if Iraq becomes second page news (aside from the economy, which is Congress's responsibility) we need a military-wise leader. And there is only one in this race.

100 years?

C A, Tuscaloosa, AL — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 21:46:42 GMT

McCain stated 100 years. McCain also stated bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran. If you don't want to be quoted or labeled as a war monger then don't talk like one. Otherwise someone just might call you on it.

The only issue McCain is running on is national security. But I have yet to hear him say anything as to how he intends to secure our borders or to provide more security for the US beyond chasing insurgents around in Iraq. If the voters don't think McCain is seeking a permanent US presence in Iraq then they are fooling themselves. We see who controls the fighting in Iraq. When Al Sadr speaks the insurgents fight and kill US soldiers. When Al Sadr says enough for now the insurgents return to their homes to catch a little TV. Back and forth, back and forth. There is no end. Take him out and all hell breaks loose. Leave him alone and he calls out his thugs now and then controling the violence level in Iraq. There is no end. Bring our troops home.

100 years?

jay — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 21:54:20 GMT

"make it a hundred"
-john mccain

keep spinning the story, johnny mac!

truth is you and your buddy, bush, have no idea what victory means. and if you don't want to pull out until there is victory, that means under your criteria we could be there indefinitely, which is certainly longer than 100 years.

start moving out asap and the iraqis will know we're serious, thus getting there act together on solving the political issues necessary for peace. we keep hanging around and handing these bozos more blank checks written in the blood of brave americans and we WILL continue to be there forever. it's not rocket science, people, and the dems are definitely right on this issue. how can you be a republican and be FOR wasting the country's treasury and precious military resources on paying for another country's civil war???

idiots!!

100 years?

fortuna, Houston, TX — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 21:55:06 GMT

[The point is, if a conventional war breaks out somewhere in the world, if Iraq becomes second page news (aside from the economy, which is Congress's responsibility) we need a military-wise leader. And there is only one in this race.]

Frankly, what we need is a military that isn't stretched to the breaking point because of the "military-wise" leadership of the Republicans. I guess you must support the draft, huh?

100 years?

Cory - Greenville, SC — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 21:58:57 GMT

I find it both odd and disturbing that John McCain can think this war is "winnable". How on earth do you even constitute what exactly winning would be? Less deaths?, less fighting?, the Iraqi gov't. actually standing up for themselves?

Get real people. The war is not winnable under any circumstances, regardless of the outcome. You know it and I know it.

http://www.politivine.com

100 years?

Alise, PA — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 21:59:56 GMT

Obama says his foreign policy will be like Reagan, Kennedy, Bush1....
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080329/ap_on_el_pr/obama_bush&printer=1;_ylt=AnUtAxtZXIhi4n57eg8O4DRh24cA

Obama is whatever people need him to be.
Want a JFK? check
Want a Reagan? check
Want a Bush1? check

IOW - Obama is trying desperately to position himself as EVERYONE's answer to everything. Typical lingo of a con man.

But everyone hasn't fallen under Obama's spell.

100 years?

kathy WI — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 22:01:56 GMT

I don't care if I ever ever see Hillary or Obama again.
McCain 08

100 years?

axt113, cleveland, oh — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 22:01:57 GMT

Troops, Americans are being harmed right now, why aren't we leaving like Mccain said?

100 years?

Steve A Jonesboro IN — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 22:04:27 GMT

Mccain has no exit strategy-for that matter no strategy at all-just "stay the course". When violence is up, we can't leave because of the violence. When violence is down, we can't leave because violence might go up again. Meanwhile we have lost over 4,000 of the finest troops in the world, and it costs the American taxpayers 12 billion dollars a month. And this is supposed to be his strong point. A vote for mccain is a vote for bush/cheney-he is simply NOT presidential!

100 years?

Frank, NC — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 22:04:38 GMT

"For those of you who are just weary of the primary, and feeling kind of ground down or that it's like a Bataan death march, I just want everybody to know that the future is bright." - Obama

Obama mocks American soldiers held by the Japanese during WW2! Thousands were killed or died of starvation!

Obama and Wright are wrong for America!
Obama's church's website scrubbed....

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/03/whos-scrubbing.html

Hey - members of the KKK were also fine upstanding Christians and attended church regularly.
But if a white presidential candidate were associated with them - he/she would be long gone!

100 years?

richard, TX — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 22:12:45 GMT

Um...wait a minute. Aren't the terrorists already upset cause we have bases in Sudia Arabia and Kuwait? I'm pretty sure I remember Bin Laden saying something about wanting our bases out of the middle east. So, perhaps having occupying Iraq for 30, 50 or 100 years isn't the best way to solve our long term goals...whatever those may be. Then again, I guess it's worked out pretty well for Israel, right?

100 years?

HP Boston — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 22:18:27 GMT

Senator McCain will be a fine president, he just has to find a new Cheney to run the whole shebang!
The easy win for John in the GE is b/c BO stinks!

100 years?

Pam Bignardi, San Pedro, California — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 22:19:05 GMT

jose, ny, ny (Sent Monday, March 31, 2008 5:26 PM)

He has a history of "waffling"!!

100 years?

Pam Bignardi, San Pedro, California — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 22:20:24 GMT

Paul, Riverside, CA (Sent Monday, March 31, 2008 5:40 PM)

And EITHER is Bill Clinton; yet Obama supporters LIE and rag on him every minute --double standard??

!!

100 years?

Chris, Little Rock AR — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 22:26:38 GMT

Ask anyone who served in the Air Force during the early 1990s when General McPeak was Air Force Chief of Staff what they think of that him...I don't think you'll get many positive remarks.

General McPeak is often regarded as among the worst Chiefs of Staff in Air Force history. That Obama doesn't know or understand this and accepts advice from the man...well, that's something I'll consider in November along with having Rev. Wright as a mentor.

100 years?

donna, pgh., pa. — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 22:26:53 GMT

Mr. McCain, how can that part of the world be very volatile, and American's saftey not be at risk, for the next hundred years? His 'hundred years' comment is being taken exactly as it should be. In the same breath, he commited to it, then distanced himself a bit, then turned right back to his original theory.

That, "...fine with me...", retort, sounds awfully callous.

This is the RNC's equivalent to Bill's "...what is, is..."?

They're actually going to try and hold Barack's feet to the fire, over someones else's statement, again! Chairman Dean is'nt an Obama surrogate. I hope Barack will stand by him, and defend what he said, if he agrees with it. He needs to put them on notice, that he won't be put on the defensive.

Pulling for Obama '08

100 years?

Citizen, Earth — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 22:31:42 GMT

I am beginning to understand my sons contempt for our Political system and our Government. He gently chides me for becoming to emotionally involved in a rigged system. He grows quiet when I try to defend the un-defendable ignorance of most Americans who assume that their Government is always right. He explains slowly to me that regardless of which party is brought to power in November, the occupation of Iraq will continue because 1000 KIA a year and Trillions of dollars is an acceptable price to most Americans who feel that this union is perfect and requires nothing now except blind obedience. He tells me that there is only one political party in the United States. The right and left wing of that party take turns running things.
This may be my last election. I will vote for the nominee of the Democratic party. If by the end of the first year we are still in Iraq then I am done. I will follow my sons advice and withdraw from useless participation in a rigged, fatally flawed fraud.
300 years has been the shelf life of past Republics. All things come to an end.

Obama or Hillary or McCain. One last try.
I don't expect much.

100 years?

voter — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 22:46:25 GMT

To Jose NY,NY
I am having trouble comprehending your comment. Obama never said the comments that Rev. Wright said. Obama denounced and rejected Wright's statements. Wright is not running for presdient. Obama is. Lets stop misconstruing facts. Second, it is okay to identify McCain's comments on youtube because the 100 year war came from his mouth. It is important to point that out because I don't think anybody wants to be in a war for 100 years. If it comes from the candidates mouth, all is fair in the election. If it didn't come from the candidates mouth, it should not be used aganist the individual. Lets stay with the facts.

100 years?

Mel — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 22:47:10 GMT

Ugh!

The point is that John McCain and, for that matter George Bush, continue to talk about "victory in Iraq" but they have never actually defined what that means.

The goal posts have kept moving and will keep moving without a plan...and how can McCain or Bush have a plan when their goal is some undefined "victory" - How do you get somewhere when you have no idea where you are going??

The press needs to realize that John McCain is running for the Presidency and stop making excuses for his every misstep. That is McCain's job...if he can't stand up to scrutiny, then he shouldn't be President....and by the way - pointing to someone's political flaws in a political campaign - is not negative campaigning.

100 years?

Sherri, Charleston WV — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 22:52:24 GMT

Tim in Mobile:
SO..........you're saying that the only reason we should elect McCain is nobody does war like a Republican? Mister, he is flying the flag of the party that got us in this G-dforsaken hole in the first place. Bush has managed to singlehandly rob the Repubs of ANY chance of winning ANYTHING in 08, Executive, Legislative, Judicial, DogCatcher, you name it. IF McCain frames his whole candidacy around the IF of some future/maybe/soon/tomorrow war, the American public assuredly is not having it.

100 years?

Lee Holmes — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 22:59:29 GMT

Obama is a weakling here,and is out of his league. Oh to be sure,he has brought better guns up on the domestic economic front,but is handily whipped here,having to fall back on a lame critique of McCains original remarks which have been finally placed into context. Oddly enough,no-one actually ever bothers to include a nation where American forces HAD been placed for ''100 years''. The Phillipines,where we remained from 1898 to 1992 with total US withdrawl not peformed until 1998. A century of American military presence,inside of a Pilipino insurgency which cropped up several times over the course of that century,with major US air,naval and Army bases all over the country.[and with US forces still assisting the Pilipino military in its anti-Abu Sayef operations].

100 years?

shirley, san jose, ca — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 23:43:09 GMT

Hillary voted with Bush and his cronies. I never heard a word from her contrary to what Bush and Cheeny recommended. Please everyone watch Frontlines 'Bushes War', Hillary is a part of that kind of politics.

100 years?

Jmp, Northern MN — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 23:43:52 GMT

**100**100**100**100**100**100**100**100**100**100**

quibbble about numbers all you want. John McCain will say let's stay in Iraq forever (not just 100) if things are going well there. And if things aren't going well there, then that's an excuse to do another (and another) surge and stay even longer.

By McCain's logic we will NEVER leave Iraq.

By his logic, he thinks Americans are ok with it, as long as no Americans are getting hurt????

I'M REALLY NOT OK WITH THIS.

100 years?

donna millbrook, al — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 23:44:17 GMT

The only candidate that has not been fully "vetted" is Obama. The main reason he touts for being President is that he has "judgment". We've all seen his judgement - Pastor Hate-monger Wright - Indicted SlumbLord Tony Rezko - top advisors backroom meetings with Canadian officials - "0" oversight hearings on committee he chairs regarding troops in Afghanistan in more than a year's time - the list goes on and on. The fact is his resume is very thin and what is there lacks any substance. He tries to take credit for all kinds of legislation passed in Congress, and we're finding out that much of this is lies also. He clearly lacks integrity, judgment and wisdom. So much for his resume.

100 years?

Jmp, Northern MN — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 23:45:16 GMT

As far as comparing Iraq to Germany and Japan...Let's do more comparison. We had MANY ALLIES to get us to the point of occupation...not that way now!

100 years?

Rick, NC — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 00:02:50 GMT

Well, John Mccain and his fellow war lovers...you see we have this problem with your occupation plans...not enough like minded gals and guys are willing to sign up and go serve a tour or three in the sands of Iraq...34% of you claim to be patriotic republicans so why is it so hard to fill the ranks?

100 years?

Americans for a president who doesn't suck — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 00:36:19 GMT

"The only thing that matters is that they are there and they need to come home now. We are pouring $720 million a day down that sandy rat hole and sea of American blood. Enough is Enough, not one more day."

twocanpete

Um twocanpete,

You do realize that the candidate you pledged such an incredible amount of loyalty to, (until he dropped out of course) Mike Huckabee, was going to keep us in Iraq right?

100 years?

Sue, Elyria, OH — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 00:54:59 GMT

tax records, earmarks, library donations???

fully vetted, NOT

100 years?

NotAStellarObamaMoment Houston TX — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 01:01:32 GMT

I'm disappointed. In general I think highly of Obama. But his statement about McCain is a crude mischaracterization.

Watch the clip. McCain made the comment about 100 years in the context of pointing out that we have had military bases in Korea for 60 years.

But it is so much easier to play dirty.

To hear Howard Dean and Nancy Pelosi and Hillary (and now Obama) spin it, you would think it was a McCain official policy white paper ADVOCATING 100 years of combat.

Again-- watch the clip.

It is one thing to take cheap shots. But do you have to take such TRANSPARENTLY SLEAZY cheap shots?

100 years?

Kevin, Salt Lake City, UT — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 01:11:38 GMT

How about Japan and Korea as the comparison. for many people, that would seem the best case, dream scenario for Iraq. But, am I the only person that thinks that American troops should not be stationed in Japan, Korea, Germany, Italy etc? Its not like our presence in those countries is costless. Sure, troops are not being killed in those places, but it is still an unsustainable tax burden on the American people, with little gain beyond military contractors, defense corporations etc.

100 years?

John Doe, Seattle, Wash — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 01:54:24 GMT

What's wrong with 100 years? How about this: Al-Qaeda was motivated to attack the US by our presence in Saudi Arabia for a handful of years. How many terrorists would it breed for us to be in Iraq for 100 years? Hundreds? Thousands? Tens of thousands? More?

100 years?

John Doe, Seattle, Wash — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 01:54:56 GMT

100 years?

jer,Bluffton,IN — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 01:58:17 GMT

Germany,Japan were defeated and South Korea we have a ceasfire. Iraq the fighting goes on in a civil war type war.
So is McCain going to be the only person to know when we can get out. There is no clear set goal that seams possible. Iraq has at least 3 different factions that don't trust the other. It's a miserable mess with no good solution other than one that makes our Country broke and Our military less able to defend us because of over extension.

100 years?

vern ruhle, macomb, il — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 02:07:18 GMT

so what's the bigs here, the cubs, hillary's former favorite team has gone 100 years without a world series title. so mccain has 94 more years to go.

100 years?

Brennan, Amarillo Texas — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 02:36:58 GMT

Daniel come on! Who are you listening too? Fox News! Please.....We all know that McCain would be the one to answer that call at 3:00a.m...... Because he would be trying to take a piss at 3 in the morning! And we all know that if the election were held today and it was between Obama and McCain. Obama would win!

100 years?

BJ, CA — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 03:00:32 GMT

Didn't he really mean only till he's 100 years old..
What's that, a couple of months?... He'll have us out of Iraq before anybody..!!!

100 years?

Bob W Mendon, NY — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 03:02:44 GMT

"And if you start with the "Iran next" crap, then have your constitutional expert Obama explain to you that a President can't go to war without congressional approval."

Nobody told Kennedy that when we went into Viet Nam and look at how easy it was for Bush to get us into Iraq. History has shown time and again that we can get into conflicts without congressional approval, i.e. Somalia, Haiti, and Panama.

100 years?

Chris New York Ny — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 03:09:53 GMT

Obama is right here. McCain loves this war and Obama doesn;t... he's just trying to back out of an unreasonable position.... any kind of suggestion to stay in Iraq for 100 years is crazy. Granddaddy McSame give it up.

I can't wait for the Fall. Obama is going to tear McSame a part.... no more Bush policies baby! And also, RNC why would Obama denounce anything Dean said... that would be what I would call stupid.

100 years?

Chris New York Ny — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 03:12:20 GMT

That's true too Clinton has said this numerous times too. Get a grip McSame... his heart his going to fail before the general anyway.

100 years?

A Charles, LA, CA — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 03:14:02 GMT

Anyone thinks that the US could have a base in IRAQ without soldiers being killed regularly, I have some very nice swamp land to sell you.

Iran will be fueling that fire that burns our soldiers every day we are there.

100 years?

Steve Turner Cedar Falls Iowa — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 03:28:19 GMT

How many of those 'Hundred Years', does McCain think he'll be alive? Are those Real Time Years, or Dog Years, or Metheusalah Years where 900 is actually 60? If it's the last one, then 100 would actually be 6 or 7. Even that sounds like too much. The candidate closest to 1 Year or Less, is gonna win. The economy is in the tank, and the war is the fault. We could've sunk a Trillion or Two in the USA and not had either problem. A Hundred Years of Real Time Money comes to 20 or 30 Trillion, not adjusted for incompetancy. Do you want to leave your Grandchildren that? Just an Independent Observation.

100 years?

Damon, NY — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 03:36:47 GMT

Guys, Obama did not misspeak, McCain did say that, he did say that we could be staying in Iraq for a 100 years, he even said for a 150 years, "because living Iraq would be surrounding" I quote him. So, as always, the Reps are using their dirty tricks to accuse Barack but McCain did say that, this is the you tube video: http://youtube.com/watch?v=iUE-QmH-n4Q&feature=related
So I challenge anyone here to say the contrary...

As far as Hillary Clinton is concerned, being the wife of a president never qualified his wife to be a president. What did Hillary accomplish as first lady ? Apart from the fact that we now know that she lied about her trip in Bosnia (huge lie) and other lies she made, what did she accomplish when she was first lady ?

This country doesn't need a dynasty, we don't need Bush-Clinton-Bush- Clinton (Hillary)?

No dynasty, Americans wake up and fight for your liberty.

100 years?

Pam OC,CA — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 03:36:52 GMT

Repetition (think Reverand Wright) is a good thing. I don't care if Obama mentions the 100 year war thang regarding McCain through November. I personally want it on everyones minds that McCain is pro-war-especially since the American public is so vehematly (sp) against it.

100 years?

jing li — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 03:54:21 GMT

it pains me to see americans whom i'm affectionate about, continue to bash Obama out of ill-informed, and ill-consdered arguements.

This guy is one of a kind candidate, he refuses to demonize his opponent for christ's sake. Remember Samantha Powers called Clinton a "monster" and she had to resign? that's the standard. Too bad, we are too busy bashing and point out wrongdoings and often let the good stuff slips away.
It's too sad, how many people don't seem to understand the country, and the world which it's in.

100 years?

Peggy Greensboro NC — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 03:54:41 GMT

Now find something else, for Pete's sake. And if you start with the "Iran next" crap, then have your constitutional expert Obama explain to you that a President can't go to war without congressional approval.

That's true. In our latest "non war" about 200k people have been killed, give or take a few tens of thousands.

This is a ludicrous argument. If McCain wants to bomb Iran if he is elected, he will simply do it and inform Congress later. I can't beleive you are not familiar with either the War Powers Act or the fact that many presidents have simply have used the military and called it a "police action" Either you are naive or you are assuming we are.

100 years?

thevaneljournal.com — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 04:12:52 GMT

http://www.thevaneljournal.com

the public will get tired of the write issue as more folks watch THE SPEECH. McCain on the other hand will have the Iraq war and the economy to deal with and neither will help him in the gen. War hero or not, people will vote with their wallets

100 years?

Gunnar,Salem, Oregon — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 04:14:11 GMT

Yes, as Senator McCain points out we have bases in Kuwait and Turkey. In such cases our "security umbrella" is propping up either outright ditcatorial monarchies or militaristic regimes that are willing to do our bidding.

He wants us to compare our potential long-term presence in Iraq to our presence in Germany and Japan after WWII. Talk about apples and oranges or maybe we should say Satsuma and dates. Does Senator McCain want us to believe that the Germans, the Japanese, the Koreans, the Turks, and the Kuwaitis (not the royals) really want to have a large contingent of U.S. military occupying parts of their country. No doubt the elite of those countries welcome us but one sincerely doubts that regular citizens like this kind of domination by the U.S.

This is what Senator Obama talks about when he says we need to change the mindset that got us into Iraq. This idea that we can go anywhere, invade anyplace, occupy it indefinitely is imperialism pure and simple. I doubt if our founding fathers intended for the USA to be an expansionist empire. We cannot hail our democracy at home and be part of oppression and the abuse of civil rights abroad. The hypocrisy is damaging for us internally and it is certainly damaging for our economic and political relations with other countries.

One needs to remember that John McCain's father and grandfather were admirals in the navy - and the tradition probably goes back much further. His worldview is shaped by his family heritage. There is no reason for the rest of us to adopt his militaristic and imperial view of the world. We should be able to defend ourselves without imposing our will - and our military might - on others. If we cannot, then we cannot really claim to be a democracy.

100 years?

Paul, Riverside, CA — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 04:22:38 GMT

To: Laura Martinez

Your arguement is old news. Unless Rev. Wright is on the ballot in November your link has absolutely no merit. Obama has answered all he needs to. Look, if your angry because of his pastor, then email the Rev. Are you angry with Hillary because she stayed with Bill after he cheated on her? Also, are you pissed off at McCain because he's a Republican and got an indorsement from Bush?

Until people come up with valid arguements, these "Guilt by Association" claims are a waste of time.

100 years?

Dave, New York, NY — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 04:24:36 GMT

Didn't this whole thing start because of our bases in the region. Isn't that what Bin Laden claims his beef with us is? Wasn't it our bases in Saudi Arabia?

100 years?

Gustavo Herrera, Baltimore MD — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 04:38:29 GMT

McCain will probably prove a significantly more competent commander-in-chief than Bush, but they share the same basic worldview that got us into Iraq. That's really my only beef against McCain, unfortunately it's a big and inreconcilable one.

Why he deserves an UNendorsement -- http://www.nationalscold.com/2008/03/unendorsement-john-mccain.html

100 years?

mary, santa barbara, calif — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 04:42:47 GMT

When asked about "100 years," McCain replied "maybe, 200 years." And then there was also his infamous, "Bomb, bomb, bomb, Bomb Iran." You showed the Bosnia videos and the Wright videos. Show the McCain--100 years videos. Oh right, McCain is Mr. Teflon, you wouldn't dare!

100 years?

mexed, san antonio, texas — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 05:09:39 GMT

McCain has lived almost 100 years so he may be thinking that it really isn' that long. As for reality, we likely won't be able to sustain it for even a few more years. We will be bankrupted - which was Ben L.'s plan from the start. Once the superpowers get in beyond their means, it just keeps draining them. Many of the greatest nations have fallen for the same reason. So, it is likely that we will either get out as soon as possible and do it the best we can to have some leverage, or we will stay and the world will watch us get weaker and weaker in so many other ways. We are not the most powerful on earth. China owns us financially. (One more reason why we are afraid of hurting their feelings over the Olympic games and likely won't protest. It has nothing to do with justice, it has to do with being afraid of them). But, we will keep pushing Cuba to the wall because we still can. It makes us feel good. McCain is in another world, another time, another underestanding of where to go. He offers nothing to get us into the future. Both Hillary and Barack could, by the very nature of both of them bring along with the general Democratic vision, an opening for the USA to move in a very different direction. Democrats Unite! This is the moment. Suck up the angers if your candidate loses the nomination and move the nation ahead, not backwards into a Republican abyss.

100 years?

JT in MO — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 05:13:50 GMT

Actually Tim from Mobile, the president can go to war for a certain amount of time without congressional approval. That is how they quickly step into military situations that need to be dealt with sooner rather than later. In terms of Iraq, the president got approval for prolonged war with a lie and the intention to occupy the country. In terms of Iran, the president could intentionally go to war with Iran without congressional approval and force congress to support the war in the aftermath of the initial onslaught due to the need to now protect the US borders and embassies from attack from Iran. And, ultimately get a forced congressional approval for a prolonged war. That thought, is scary when you really think about it my friend.

100 years?

Dagmar — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 05:14:58 GMT

You cannot compare Germany or Korea or Japan with Iraq. I was was born Germany and for decades now the US forces are staying as guests of the German people. We welcome them and they used to be one of the largest employers in Germany.... BUT, Germany is a Christian nation. That makes all the difference. Staying in Iraq, what is considered Holy Land by the Muslims, is totally different. We - I am a US citizen - are NOT welcome and will never be welcomed as occupiers in Iraq or any other Muslim nation. Our troops will always be under attack there and our occupation of Iraq will continue to be the only advertisement Al Queda needs to recruit more kids as suicide bombers.

100 years?

Carol, Long Valley NJ — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 05:32:17 GMT

Tim, Mobile (Sent Monday, March 31, 2008 5:43 PM)

No, we need an intellectually engaged President. One who will LISTEN to all sides of a debate and make up their mind based on facts. McCain would only see a military solution -- it's in his genes.

100 years?

Fred,Bellevue,nebraska — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 05:39:51 GMT

what a joke, I can not wait until the General election starts. 4 more years of Bush is not what we need and John McCain is just that. You can not just throw 100 years out there and think you wont get attacked on it. We shouldnt be in Korea either

100 years?

Ted in Chicago — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 06:23:58 GMT

I do not agree at all with McCain on IRAQ

However - in this case - BO did take the quote out of context

There are enough wrong things McCain says and has said about IRAQ and our involvement that we can let him have his 100 year in context comment - and still not like the McCain position

BO was taking a somewhat soundbitey shot - maybe a cheap shot - but hey - it is politics

100 years?

Steven F, P.A., Ca — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 07:09:59 GMT

So how long is ok Senator McCain if American soliders are being injured or wounded or killed in Iraq?

And how are you going to fund it?

And how are you going to get enough troops?

When are you going to institute a draft Senator McCain?

Because as soon as you do, we are out of there!

100 years?

Max, Minneapolis — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 07:46:56 GMT

Jason, With all respects, McPeak is not Obama's top national security advisor... He just isn't.

I challenge you to back up this with any link claiming this.

100 years?

HTD Michigan — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 09:36:11 GMT

Lets see Obama we are misconstruing the Rev. Wright comments and taking them out of context but you’re not doing the same here???? Give me a break.

100 years?

Patti P., Madera, Ca. — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 10:08:33 GMT

Obama is an expert in the field of semantics & in the
art of smoozing--what you see, is NOT what you'd get!!
He's an illusionist. McCain did NOT say he was willing
to FIGHT the war in Iraq for 100 yrs.--Obama KNOWS
that (again, semantics!!!). Problem is,too large of
a segment of the voting public is of the same
mentality as the people interviewed on "Jaywalking"--
they believe Obama's words & HE'S COUNTING ON THAT!!!
In Obama, I sense the handiwork of L. Farakan &
J. Wright (plus who knows who else??). NO THANK YOU!!!
Too scary a scenario for me!!!!

100 years?

Beverly, Chicago — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 10:49:09 GMT

*a military-wise leader?*

Tim, you need to appear on Jay Leno along side Clinton. Your judgment is absurd and laughable. How can you call McCain wise? He doesn't even know where the enemy is or the difference between Sunni and Shiite.

Worst of all, he didn't know Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, began an offensive in Basra which McCain said they did without consulting the U.S. Despite the fact that Muqtada al-Sadr had ordered his Shiite militiamen off the streets.

BTW: If you bring McCain with you, don't forget to hold his hand; nice e seems to be a little absent minded at times.
Our constitutional expert Obama said he is against a stupid war. So it seems like he won’t go to a stupid war without congressional approval.

100 years?

Dave, Tn — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 10:56:17 GMT

Just another typical lying Liberal.

100 years?

Garmel from Oregon — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 11:17:19 GMT

When either one of the canidates realise that the ARABs world don't want US troop on arab land. Maybe then they can figure an way to get out and still have peace.