[Allheart]

This thread is hereby established as a place to post POSITIVE attributes that apply to this canadate.

Things that you find about this canadate that are positive.

Due to all the negative press and mudslinging, having a place to come to post and read positive issues that apply to the canadates, perhaps can better help us with our upcoming descions.

Each canadate shall have their own thread.

(***This outstanding idea of sharing positive issues relating to a particular candidate was given by NeedKarma. Thank you NK - I am truly so excited and I think it will be very beneifical.**_

[xphelper]

He doesn't make promises that are impossible to keep.

[Allheart]

John McCain -

Does and always will have a special place in my heart. I love John McCain for his service to our country, which includes 5 1/2 years as a POW, which he could have be released eariler then he was, because of who is father was, but he refused to go and leave the others behind... That is someone we can be proud of.

Thanks John.

[shygrneyzs]

He has been an outspoken crusader against wasteful spending.

He has been able to cross party lines and work with both to get a job done.

McCain won't give in to the ultra rich republican desire for elimination of the death tax, ie. Federal Estate Tax.

He does not make apologies for what he believes in or for what he stands for. I believe in his honesty.

McCain's call for any group of people to create an insurable interest, removal of state regulation of health insurance, and direct tax credits for low income to pay for health care, and total deductibility are fairly good ideas. Less pressure on state budgets, decrease uninsureds, and increase private sector competition.

That's my two cents. Of course, someone will disagree with me, which is their right.

[Allheart]

That's my two cents. Of course, someone will disagree with me, which is their right.

No they can't... not on this thread... nope... :p

Well they can :o but I hope they don't :o

Only because there's plenty of negative swirling around about all the canadates, and it becomes so difficult to see these positive points.

So these threads are a little shelter from the "storms out there " :)

But of course, everyone's voice, no matter the words, should have a right to be heard.

Boo hiss :)

[shygrneyzs]

There should be ban on negative campaigning and negative broadcasting. Am surprised with Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh. I know it is their right to disagree but so vehemently? I quit listening to both of them.

[NeedKarma]

Am surprised with Ann Coulter

Don't be, there's something very wrong with her.

[N0help4u]

He *somehow* beat all the other Republicans

[Wondergirl]

He's lived a long life with a great deal of experience in the business world, the military, raising a family, dealing with the government, and probably grocery shopping and newspaper reading. I don't envision him as someone who would play ostrich, but who would want to hear and consider all sides of an issue before making a decision on it. I think of him as honest and fair and truthful.

[magprob]

He... uhm... uhm... he... ugh... let's see... he uhm, uhm... ugh... he... well, he, hm... ugh... Sorry, can't.

[tomder55]

He showed his heroism and bravery in both the USS Forrestal fire and in his time as a POW . He rehabilitated from his many injuries and qualified to fly again. But in fact his injuries had derailed his goals of making the Navy his lifetime career . He could not follow the example of his father and grandfather by becoming an Admiral . He did continued his distinguished military career for a time ,gaining executive experience by being the USN leader of the liaison Dept. with the US Senate .He ushered through Congress the Navy's aquistion of a new Super Carrier despite President Jimmy Carter's objections.
In his service in the Navy he received the silver star,a bronze star,purple hearts,the Legion of Merit,and the Distinguished Flying Cross. He retired as a Captain.

In the private sector he served as a VP of Public Relations for Anheuser-Busch (working for his new father in law).
But he was just biding his time until he could get an opportunity on Capitol Hill .

He became a Congressman in 1982.During this time he had 2 children with his new wife ,and adopted a girl in need of medical attention ,from Bangladesh ,from an orphanage run by Mother Teresa .

In 1986 he ran for and won the Senate seat of retired Senator Barry Goldwater . He immediately became an influential member of the Commerce Committee ,the Armed Services Committee and the Indian Affairs Committee.

Since his involvement in the Keating 5 scandal he has been a champion of ethics reform and campaign finance reform (he went too far with the McCain -Feingold law but this is supposed to be a positive only account). He has been a consistent crusader against wasteful spending and ear-marks ;battling in many instances his own party on the issues.

Although I have strong disagreement with McCain on some of the issues I think he is right on the most important issue ;national security and the war on us by jihadistan. I think he will appoint judges who are originalists ;and I think he would continue to be a strong advocate against wasteful government spending as President. Just these issues alone makes him heads above the Democrat candidates.

[Allheart]

Wow Tom.

Thank you so much for all that you shared. Most I did not know. Oh I love him even more now as a person. But I have to be careful and not think with mostly my heart.

See, what we have to be careful of, is cutting "wasteful Goverment spending". If he plans on looking to DoD and cutting there, as tends to happen, it not good. It's not good at all.
This would prevent me from voting for him.

We can not keep expecting DoD to protect us for less.

***edit :o OMG I think I broke my own rules (but you know there really aren't any rules - but positive comments were the goal... I am so sorry)


Okay, I will ask in question format -

Is he planning to cut any from DoD?

***sorry everyone***:o

[NeedKarma]

His "100 years of war in Iraq" will guarantee employment for young american men without the requirement for expensive education.

[Allheart]

His "100 years of war in Iraq" will guarantee employment for young american men without the requirement for expensive education.

Yes, his 100 years war in Iraq, will guarantee our young men and women will be serving, but if he cuts DoD - They will be expected to serve still, but with less support.

The motto Do more with less will continue to apply - and it's just wrong.

Of course if that happens DoD will stand strong and push harder and reach further, as always and meet and exceed every expectation- but when cutting DoD the negative ramifications are felt and a great deal of folks don't realize how dearly it is felt.

[tomder55]

He did not say he planned on staying in Iraq for 100 years . What he did say was that he would not leave until the country was secure. Have we left Europe yet ? No.. Have we left South Korea yet ? No . Have we left the Balkans yet ? No . He unlike the other candidates has talked responsibly and the truth . They won't leave Iraq before the job is done either despite their pandering to the code pinko wing of the party.

He says he will expand the military.

Increasing the Size of the American Military
The most important weapons in the U.S. arsenal are the men and women of American armed forces. John McCain believes we must enlarge the size of our armed forces to meet new challenges to our security. For too long, we have asked too much of too few – with the result that many service personnel are on their second, third and even fourth tours of duty in Afghanistan and Iraq. There can be no higher defense priority than the proper compensation, training, and equipping of our troops.
Our existing force is overstretched by the combination of military operations in the broader Middle East and the need to maintain our security commitments in Europe and Asia. Recruitment and retention suffer from extended overseas deployments that keep service personnel away from their homes and families for long periods.
John McCain believes that the answer to these challenges is not to roll back our overseas commitments. The size and composition of our armed forces must be matched to our nation's defense requirements. As requirements expand in the global war on terrorism so must our Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines, and Coast Guard be reconfigured to meet these new challenges. John McCain thinks it is especially important to increase the size of the Army and Marine Corps to defend against the threats we face today.
John McCain knows that the most difficult and solemn decision a president must make is sending young Americans into harm's way. Having experienced firsthand the brutality of war, as president, John McCain would never make the decision to use force lightly, only when the cause is just, and our nation's values and interests absolutely demand it.
Modernizing the Armed Services
Modernizing American armed forces involves procuring advanced weapons systems that will help rapidly and decisively defeat any adversary and protect American lives. It also requires addressing force protection needs to make sure that America's combat personnel have the best safety and survivability equipment available.
Modernizing the armed forces also means adapting our doctrine, training, and tactics for the kind of conflicts we are most likely to face. Today, American forces are engaged in dangerous operations throughout the world. From Iraq and Afghanistan to Somalia and the Philippines, American forces are fighting the battles of the 21st century against terrorists and insurgents. These asymmetric conflicts require a very different force structure than the one we used to fight and win the Cold War.
The missions of the 21st century will not center on traditional territorial defense or mass armor engagements. Instead, the men and women of the U.S. armed forces will be engaged in, among other things, counter insurgency, counter terrorism, missile defense, counter proliferation and information warfare. This calls not just for a larger and more capable military, but for a new mix of military forces, including civil affairs, special operations, and highly mobile forces capable of fighting and prevailing in the conflicts America faces.
Smarter Defense Spending
John McCain has worked aggressively to reform the defense budgeting process to ensure that America enjoys the best military at the best cost. This includes reforming defense procurement to ensure the faithful and efficient expenditure of taxpayer dollars that are made available for defense acquisition. Too often, parochial interests – rather than the national interest – have guided our spending decisions. John McCain supports significant reform in our defense acquisition process to ensure that dollars spent actually contribute to U.S. security.
John McCain also feels strongly that our nation's military spending, except in time of genuine emergency, must be funded by the regular appropriations process, not by "emergency" supplementals that allow defense to be funded outside the normal budget cycle. This process gives Congressional committees less ability to closely scrutinize defense budget requests to ensure military funding is being budgeted wisely. It makes possible Congressional pork-barrel spending that diverts scarce defense resources to parochial home-state interests. And it allows the administration to add spending above that set by budget caps, bloating the federal deficit. Budgeting annually through emergency supplemental appropriation bills encourages pork barrel spending. The American taxpayer has a right to expect us to get the most out of every defense dollar, especially at a time when those dollars are so critical. Throughout his career, John McCain has fought pork-barrel defense spending that diverts scarce defense resources to parochial, home-state projects rather than addressing the needs of service personnel. He believes that unauthorized earmarks drain our precious defense resources and adversely affect our national security. John McCain will continue to fight pork-barrel spending to ensure that military funds are spent where they are needed most – in support of our military personnel and our national defense.
Taking Care of our Military Personnel and their Families
Our military personnel and their families deserve the nation's unfailing gratitude, respect, and support. As a former naval officer with a distinguished record of military service, John McCain understands the profound sacrifices made by our men and women who serve in the uniform of our country and their families.
He believes one of America's most solemn obligations is to treat our military personnel with the same sense of devotion and duty as they demonstrate in rendering their service to the nation. John McCain has fought for improved military pay and benefits, and an improved quality of life for military families.
America's deployments in Iraq and Afghanistan rely heavily on Reserve and National Guard forces. John McCain has worked hard to ensure that benefits for deployed Reservists and National Guardsmen are brought in line with our active-duty military forces.
As president, he will make sure that just as we are always proud of our military personnel for what they do for the country, the country can be proud of what we do for them.
Honoring our Nation's Commitments to Veterans and Military Retirees
John McCain has worked tirelessly to protect increased benefits for America's veterans. He understands that our country has a duty to care for veterans who have honorably served. John McCain will continue to look out for the men and women who have answered our nation's call. America must never leave its military retirees in any doubt that it will keep its commitments to them for their many years of faithful service. John McCain has been a champion of military retirees in the Senate and believes that it is especially important to ensure retired service personnel enjoy full health care and benefits comparable to that received by retired federal employees. John McCain understands that a key to recruiting and retaining a new generation of American military personnel is demonstrating that our government keeps its promises to retired service members. He will remain an unwavering champion for the rights of military retirees and their families.

John McCain 2008 - John McCain for President

and read his report on his "Commitment To America's Service Members: Past And Present "

John McCain 2008 - John McCain for President

[Allheart]

Tom,

Again thanks. Wealth of information. And cleared up a lot.

This is my area of concern:




to ensure that America enjoys the best military at the best cost. This includes reforming defense procurement to ensure the faithful and efficient expenditure of taxpayer dollars that are made available for defense acquisition. Too often, parochial interests – rather than the national interest – have guided our spending decisions. John McCain supports significant reform in our defense acquisition process to ensure that dollars spent actually contribute to U.S. security.

I agree 100% with Sen McCain's view on this - but what tends to happen is when "significant reform in our defense acquisiton process" is discussed, when his
view is put forth into action, it ultimately hurts the warfighter. That's truly where the buck doesn't stop, at least as past history indicates.

He's right, but his plan must be applied appropriately and in the correct areas and not seap into others.

I love the guy, I truly do. We've just been down this road too many times.

Also, ensuring the military gets the most for it's dollar and the tax payer gets the most for its dolllar, has to mean... best value for it's dollar, and not... minimum needs, which in the long run, ends up costing more, and again ultimately hurts the warfighter.

So, I am with Sen. McCain 100% - Just so leary and nervous when it is time for application.

But I do love they guy.

[NeedKarma]

He did not say he planned on staying in Iraq for 100 years . What he did say was that he would not leave until the country was secure.

Wrong. Here it is:

[Allheart]

I think there is a difference between "maintaining prescense and "war". And I do understand his reasoning - If it means keeping peace there and American's safe and the world safe, then I too, see nothing wrong with our being there.

I just wish the bloodshed would stop. But I have heard of many great improvements being made in Iraq as a result of the Coallition's efforts.

This statement that he made is SO true:
For too long, we have asked too much of too few

[tomder55]

But I have heard of many great improvements being made in Iraq as a result of the Coallition's efforts.

Danville Register Bee | 'The surge is working'

The Press Association: US hails Iraq peace progress

One year ago, when neither the war nor political reconciliation was going well, the Bush administration reluctantly agreed to 18 benchmarks for judging progress in Iraq. And the Democratic Congress eagerly wrote the benchmarks into law, also requiring the administration to report back in July and September on whether the benchmarks were being met.
Despite the surge of additional American troops and a new counterinsurgency strategy, the reports found little progress on the political benchmarks requiring tangible steps toward reconciliation between Shia and Sunnis. Democrats insisted this meant the surge had failed.

They had a point, but not anymore. The surge, by quelling violence and providing security, was supposed to produce "breathing space" in which reconciliation could take place. Now it has, not because President Bush says so, but based on those same benchmarks that Democrats once claimed were measures of failure in Iraq.

Last week, the Iraqi parliament passed three laws that amounted to a political surge to achieve reconciliation. Taken together, the laws are likely to bring minority Sunnis fully into the political process they had earlier boycotted and to produce a new class of political leaders.

Just as important is what the laws reflect in Iraq today. "The whole motivating factor" behind the legislation was "reconciliation, not retribution," says American ambassador Ryan Crocker, who has never sugarcoated the impediments to progress in Iraq. This is "remarkably different" from six months ago, he said.

The Iraqi government had made progress on nine of the 18 benchmarks before last week. But these were the easier ones, like forming a constitutional review committee or establishing security stations in Baghdad with American and Iraqi soldiers. The new laws deal with the harder, more divisive issues.

The most controversial--and the toughest to enact--gives significant power to provincial councils and mandates new provincial elections by October 1. As a result, leaders of the so-called Sunni Awakening who have broken with al Qaeda and insurgents are all but certain to gain power. And Iraq will have a decentralized, federal system of government.

In assessing progress last fall, the administration conceded the Iraqis had "not made significant progress" on achieving the benchmark on provincial powers. Now they have.

Next in importance to reconciliation is an amnesty law under which thousands of jailed Sunnis who haven't been charged with a crime will be released. Months ago, the administration said "the prerequisites for a successful general amnesty are not present." But the surge changed that by reducing violence and creating the conditions for amnesty.

If they wish, Democrats can cite the failure of the Iraqi parliament to pass a "hydrocarbons" law to codify the sharing of oil revenues among the Shia, Sunnis, and Kurds. And that law is still needed, particularly to provide a framework for managing the oil sector of the Iraqi economy.

In effect, however, the Iraqis are now sharing oil revenues through the $48 billion budget they passed. Ten billion dollars is to be distributed to the provinces without any sectarian bias. By the way, the vast majority of the $48 billion came from oil production.

A few weeks ago, the Iraqi government dealt with still another benchmark involving reconciliation. It called for "enacting and implementing a de-Baathification reform" to allow thousands of bureaucrats and officials in Saddam Hussein's regime to regain their jobs. Last fall, the Iraqis had "not made satisfactory progress" on this reform.

The new law has been criticized as too complicated. It may be as likely to force former Baathists--Sunnis mostly--out of jobs as it is to provide them with job opportunities. Crocker said the law will have to be straightened out by the executive council of Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki, the president (a Kurd), and two vice presidents (Shia and Sunni). "They're approaching it from a spirit of reconciliation," he said. We'll see.

When the second benchmarks report was released last September, Democrats jumped on it. Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid said the report "shows the president's flawed escalation policy is not working." According to Democratic senator Joe Biden of Delaware, "all it does is point out the failure." Democratic senator Jack Reed of Rhode Island said the Iraqi government "is not making progress .  .  . with respect to these benchmarks."

Now, the facts on the ground have changed dramatically, and so has progress on the benchmarks. Will Democrats acknowledge this? Or will they continue to claim the surge has failed and demand rapid withdrawal of our troops? So far, Democrats have reacted with silence.

"Facts are stubborn," Hillary Clinton said last month, "and I know it's sometimes hard to keep track of facts. But facts matter." Indeed they do. But with Democrats, the warning of former Harvard dean Henry Rosovsky may apply. "Never underestimate the difficulty," he said, "of changing false beliefs by facts."

Fred Barnes is executive editor of THE WEEKLY STANDARD.

[ordinaryguy]

I quit listening to both of them.

This is the right response.