Yes, you read the subject right.

This country has some serious problems. The economy is bad and getting
worse. The poor will remain so and their numbers continue to grow as the
middle class continues to struggle... to keep their home... to keep their
jobs. The environment continues to degrade and the effects of global warming
continue to expand, now even increasing allergic reactions. We are hated
overseas, our stature having fallen dramatically since the moral support we
received after the attacks of seven years ago this coming Thursday faded
when we took up a war of choice. We have 140,000 troops in Iraq, still a
major war and fragile situation, according to Gen. Patraeus, despite the
"success" of the surge so touted by the Right. The war in Afghanistan is
getting worse with Al Qaeda and the Taliban on the attack. Pakistan is even
more unstable (the most dangerous country in the world). We're
saber-rattling over Iran, and the Israelis are gearing up for an air-strike,
which could easily lead to a region-wide conflict.

Domestically, we're in the middle of a tightly contest election.

On one side, we have John McCain, a war hero in his 70s, who doesn't know
much about the economy or even how to use a computer. He has a historical
reputation for being honest and taking on the special interests, except for
a few lapses in judgement, for example, with women and with powerful
friends. He graduated at the bottom of his Annapolis class, where he had a
reputation for being the leader of the troublemakers. He became a fighter
pilot. He was part of some landmark, if relatively ineffective ethics reform
legislation, and he voted against making Martin Luther King's birthday a
national holiday and against alternative energy legislation.

He picked a running mate for Veep, a woman who has little experience beyond
being a governor of a low-population state for a couple of years. She has
attempted to mislead us about several things, including the supposed "Bridge
to Nowhere," and she's being insulated from the press. Fortunately, it's
impossible for her to be fully insulated, and some of the hypocrisy is
coming out (e.g.,
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080909/...el_expenses_1).
She has some fairly non-mainstream views, even by the Right viewpoint.
Contrary to the claims, she was likely poorly vetted and only met with the
McCain twice before he selected her. It was a politically savvy move for
sure.

On the other side, we have a relatively inexperienced mixed-race man in his
late 40s. After he got his BA from Columbia, he eventually moved to Chicago
and worked for a church-based organization that helped the desperately poor
and disenfranchised on the South Side. This has been derided by the Right,
even though this is exactly what Republican candidate called for in his
convention speech. Barak Obama, the guy with the funny name, eventually
returned to school, received his law degree from Harvard. He was at the top
of his class. He taught constitutional law. Eventually, he ran for public
office, and finally was elected to the US Senate. As a junior senator, he
worked in the nuts and bolts of getting stuff done. He's been married for 20
years.

He picked a seasoned professional Senator as a running mate, someone who is
far from perfect, but is highly experienced in foreign affairs, being the
current Chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee. The presidential
candidate spend an enormous amount of time selecting his running mate,
rightly claiming that it was the first, most important decision he needed to
make. The man he selected has been at the center of major legislative
initiates for years. Since he's been in the Senate all of his political
career, some 30 years, and he did not become rich. His first wife and
daughter died on the eve of him taking office for the first time. He and his
current wife have been married since 1977. He still commutes home to
Delaware most every evening, a practice that started when he two sons were
injured in the car accident that killed his first wife and daughter.

Here's what McCain said in his speech:

"If you find faults with our country, make it a better one. If you're
disappointed with the mistakes of government, join its ranks and work to
correct them. Enlist in our armed forces. Become a teacher. Enter the
ministry. Run for public office. Feed a hungry child. Teach an illiterate
adult to read. Comfort the afflicted. Defend the rights of the oppressed.
Our country will be the better, and you will be the happier. Because nothing
brings greater happiness in life than to serve a cause greater than
yourself."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_McCain
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barak_Obama
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarah_Palin
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Biden

There's been a lot of lying going on about who these people are and what
they stand for, and this is not helping our country. The Bush Administration
and many on the Right have been degrading our personal liberties in the name
of "security" for their political ambitions. The Democrats have not been
effective at countering these attacks, and they hold much of the blame. They
seem unable or unwilling to assert themselves, using the argument that it's
not in the country's best interest.

"Swift-boating" has become somehow acceptable... wherein one is attacked for
one's strengths. The Right is relentless in this regard. The new attack
example via Rudy Guiliani and Sara Palin deriding Obama for being a
"community organizer," as though there's something wrong with that. Besides
the hate-mongering and the blatant lies that are promulgated on talk shows
(e.g., Rush Limbaugh) and "news" shows (e.g., Fox), there is a much fueled
misconception about left wing bias in the news media. This is creating a
one-version news nation. This is devastating to our country, and it happens
in a large measure because the big corporations (Disney, Viacom,
Westinghouse, GE, Microsoft, Time-Warner, Rupert Murdoch) that control the
news services are beholden to the Right. Here's a slightly old link:
http://la.indymedia.org/news/2003/04/47530.php. And, here's what's been
going on lately: http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwa...8/09/08/msnbc/.

John McCain will likely be the next President of the United States. Get used
to it Democrats and "Independents" (not sure how anyone can be independent
at this point) or do something. Your choice. As a first step, we all need to
stop the politics of personal destruction -- a phrase that was made familiar
by Pres. Clinton during the impeachment process, but was a propaganda
technique first used in modern times during the Robert Bork nomination
process. Families, for one thing, are and should remain out of bounds.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Dave" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 9 Sep 2008 13:03:12 -0700, "Capt. JG"
said:

Yes, you read the subject right.

You're sounding almost as shrill as Begala was this morning, Jon. Feeling
really desperate, eh?


I notice you didn't do anything, except attack me. I know I'm an optimist...
I was expecting better from you.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

Capt. JG wrote:
Yes, you read the subject right.
....
He graduated at the bottom of his Annapolis class, where he had a
reputation for being the leader of the troublemakers. He became a fighter
pilot.
....

John McCain was NOT a fighter pilot. He never trained on a fighter, was
never trained in air-to-air combat, he never flew a fighter, he was
never in a dog-fight. He was not a fighter pilot.

Dave wrote:
On Tue, 09 Sep 2008 19:03:33 -0400, jeff said:

He graduated at the bottom of his Annapolis class, where he had a
reputation for being the leader of the troublemakers. He became a fighter
pilot.
...

John McCain was NOT a fighter pilot. He never trained on a fighter, was
never trained in air-to-air combat, he never flew a fighter, he was
never in a dog-fight. He was not a fighter pilot.

I take it you wish us to infer

Why would I want you to infer anything? I'm just stating a fact.

that bomber pilots are cowardly, whereas
fighter pilots are brave? That the other side only shot at fighters, and not
at bombers?

It is the McCain supporters that want us to infer that he was like Tom
Cruise in Top Gun (call sign Maverick) when he was not.

Gimme a break.

Why? Does the truth hurt that bad? You seem very sensitive about this.

"jeff" wrote in message
. ..
Capt. JG wrote:
Yes, you read the subject right.
...
He graduated at the bottom of his Annapolis class, where he had a
reputation for being the leader of the troublemakers. He became a fighter
pilot.
...

John McCain was NOT a fighter pilot. He never trained on a fighter, was
never trained in air-to-air combat, he never flew a fighter, he was never
in a dog-fight. He was not a fighter pilot.


I stand corrected.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"jeff" wrote in message
. ..
Dave wrote:
On Tue, 09 Sep 2008 19:03:33 -0400, jeff said:

He graduated at the bottom of his Annapolis class, where he had a
reputation for being the leader of the troublemakers. He became a
fighter pilot.
...

John McCain was NOT a fighter pilot. He never trained on a fighter, was
never trained in air-to-air combat, he never flew a fighter, he was
never in a dog-fight. He was not a fighter pilot.

I take it you wish us to infer

Why would I want you to infer anything? I'm just stating a fact.

that bomber pilots are cowardly, whereas
fighter pilots are brave? That the other side only shot at fighters, and
not
at bombers?

It is the McCain supporters that want us to infer that he was like Tom
Cruise in Top Gun (call sign Maverick) when he was not.

Gimme a break.

Why? Does the truth hurt that bad? You seem very sensitive about this.


Dave is very sensitive after learning that Bush wasn't quite the fighter
jock he made him self out to be.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

A thinly veiled hit piece at best.


"Dave" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 9 Sep 2008 13:03:12 -0700, "Capt. JG"
said:

Yes, you read the subject right.

You're sounding almost as shrill as Begala was this morning, Jon. Feeling
really desperate, eh?

"jeff" wrote in message
. ..
Capt. JG wrote:
Yes, you read the subject right.
...
He graduated at the bottom of his Annapolis class, where he had a
reputation for being the leader of the troublemakers. He became a fighter
pilot.
...

John McCain was NOT a fighter pilot. He never trained on a fighter, was
never trained in air-to-air combat, he never flew a fighter, he was never
in a dog-fight. He was not a fighter pilot.

But yet he carried AIM-9 missiles. Yet there were 4 fighter squadrons of
A-4.

http://www.skyhawk.org/2e/navy.htm


Are you sure?

"jeff" wrote in message
. ..
Capt. JG wrote:
Yes, you read the subject right.
...
He graduated at the bottom of his Annapolis class, where he had a
reputation for being the leader of the troublemakers. He became a fighter
pilot.
...

John McCain was NOT a fighter pilot. He never trained on a fighter, was
never trained in air-to-air combat, he never flew a fighter, he was never
in a dog-fight. He was not a fighter pilot.

Air combat maneuvering is part of the tailhook syllabus:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_..._Naval_Aviator

McCain did receive fighter pilot training.

Dave wrote:
On Tue, 09 Sep 2008 21:46:24 -0400, jeff said:

John McCain was NOT a fighter pilot. He never trained on a fighter, was
never trained in air-to-air combat, he never flew a fighter, he was
never in a dog-fight. He was not a fighter pilot.
I take it you wish us to infer
Why would I want you to infer anything? I'm just stating a fact.

I was wondering the same thing myself. Why are you making an issue of this
distinction without a difference? Particularly since you state with such
confidence that he was not a fighter pilot, without completing the thought
by saying he was a bomber pilot? Might that indicate some kind of an agenda?
Nah.

I am merely a seeker of the truth. You seem to think that the paramount
issue is some question of bravery, as though any comment about his past
must be interpreted as a comment on his heroism.


that bomber pilots are cowardly, whereas
fighter pilots are brave? That the other side only shot at fighters, and not
at bombers?
It is the McCain supporters that want us to infer that he was like Tom
Cruise in Top Gun (call sign Maverick) when he was not.

Perhaps I've missed it but I haven't seen any such thing.

Yes, I suppose it would be easy to miss the work "Maverick" associated
with McCain. And you must have not read a paper in the last 20 years or
so, because he's repeatedly been referred to as a fighter pilot.

He flew a plane
over N. Vietnam. He was doing something that cause the other guys to shoot
at him. (Are you going to make a thing about the fact that it was missiles
rather than bullets they shot?) They hit him, and he had to bail out and was
captured. Of what relevance is it that he was flying one type of plane
rather than another? None that I can see.

I said nothing about all the these facts, yet you have not missed the
opportunity to bring them up. Perhaps you're the one with an agenda?

OK, I'll let you win this: being shot down means that John McCain is the
Bravest Man Ever To Fight For This Or Any Country.

So what about my Father-in-Law? He served in the Merchant Marine, was
chased into ice fields by U-boats, strafed by fighters, survived PQ-17
and PQ-18, and eventually was torpedoed and spent 17 days in a liferaft.
And guess what? He wasn't made president! I guess he wasn't brave
enough. (In fact, the VFW and American Legion blocked attempts to give
the MM benefits because they considered them draft dodgers.)


Gimme a break.
Why? Does the truth hurt that bad? You seem very sensitive about this.

Not at all. It's just that your trying to make such a big deal out of a
distinction without a difference is so obviously disingenuous.

Obvious to who? What seems obvious to me is that McCain is too honest
to refer to himself as a "fighter pilot," but the GOP loves the Top Gun
image. Somehow the concept of fighting mano-a-mano in the sky is more
appealing than dropping napalm and cluster bombs.

Personally, I believe McCain is an honorable and brave man, who
performed heroic service to his country. However, this does not by
itself mean he has any specific qualifications to be president, any more
than my FiL did. I feel insulted when his campaign issues statement
like the one after the "cone of silence" episode: "[t]he insinuation
from the Obama campaign that John McCain, a former prisoner of war,
cheated is outrageous." What does that mean? Than because he was a
POW, his Karl Rove trained staff would not have said at the last minute,
"You may be asked something like ..."? In fact, protestations like that
convinced me that his team did cheat, and they are hiding behind the
"POW Shield."