McCain's Age...
 

McCain's Age...
 

On Aug 30, 10:00*am, BAR wrote:
wrote:
On Fri, 29 Aug 2008 21:14:13 -0700, CalifBill wrote:

Actually is not obvious at all. *Obama has no, zero, nada executive
experience.

You are overlooking the obvious. *So far, he has run a successful
campaign. *It may not seem like much, but, if you pay attention,
campaigns to show how a candidate behaves under pressure, his
organizational skills, finances, etc. *My left leaning bias may be
showing, but so far, I haven't been impressed with McCain's campaign. *I
have been with Obama's. *However, this is where the fun starts. *The next
10 weeks will be interesting. *It's close. *It's relatively clean. *I'm
interested.

He hasn't run the campaign. Remember the 57 states gaff and his staff
not letting him visit Hawaii or Alaska? Obama is being handled.

Oh no dude.. He is running the campaign, writing all of his own
speeches, he even built the Greek temple in Denver, and still has time
to covort with terrorists, racists, and hostile leaders of "little
countries"... Ask Harry, this guy does it all;)

McCain's Age...
 

hk wrote:
TJ wrote:
wrote:
On Fri, 29 Aug 2008 21:14:13 -0700, CalifBill wrote:


Actually is not obvious at all. Obama has no, zero, nada executive
experience.

You are overlooking the obvious. So far, he has run a successful
campaign. It may not seem like much, but, if you pay attention,
campaigns to show how a candidate behaves under pressure, his
organizational skills, finances, etc. My left leaning bias may be
showing, but so far, I haven't been impressed with McCain's
campaign. I have been with Obama's. However, this is where the fun
starts. The next 10 weeks will be interesting. It's close. It's
relatively clean. I'm interested.

Candidates don't run campaigns anymore. That's what they hire campaign
managers to do.

Someone said during the primaries that the Presidency is no place for
on-the-job training. That sounds like something someone who has never
actually run something would say. Even Vice Presidents don't know what
it really involves to be President, though they probably are closer to
it than almost anybody else. As someone who has been an "XO" who later
became the "CO," I can tell you that until that responsibility
actually rests on your shoulders, you don't know what it is, and you
soon find out that many of the things you thought you could do can't
be done after all.

As there is no one running that has been President before, there isn't
a one of them that has any "experience." That's the case with at least
half of the elections in the history of the country. What makes this
one so different? What we need is someone with the ability to learn
and adapt, and to do it quickly, because the country might not have
the time to wait. Obama is young, and he's arrogant enough to still
think he has all the answers. McCain is seasoned, but is he so old
that he can't adapt to the situations he would face?

There is no clear choice in this election, if you ask me.

TJ


I'm voting for Obama, the candidate who has the wisdom and judgment to
make the important decisions, including picking a top-drawer running mate.

The respect I once had for McCain declines almost daily. He's not suited
by intellect or by temperament to be president, and his personal war
experience is completely irrelevant, strategically, tactically, and
morally. He's out of touch with today's realities, technologies, and
possibilities. Frankly, he reminds me of an aging barnyard rooster whose
world has passed him by.

He's a 72-year-old man with really serious health issues, a man who
could take sick and become incapacitated at a moment's notice, and who
does he pick for a running mate? A PTA mom with no experience on the
world stage, and why did he choose her? To pander to evangelicals and
women voters.

McCain would be a worse president than George W. Bush, who quite
probably is the worst president in the history of the United States, or
damned close to it.

The choice is clear...someone like Obama who can lead us into the
future, or someone like McCain...who will give us more of the same.

By the way, I appreciate your well-reasoned post.

Thanks. I appreciate that.

But when you come right down to it, age is just a number. I'm 59, close
to the middle of the candidate's ages. I thought I was wise at 45, but I
can look back at some things and wonder what the hell I was thinking
back then. I also have known people who were old and feeble at my age
and others that were quick and vital in their 80's. It's a very
individual thing.

Before I decide who I want for my leader, I want to know where he wants
to take me. I haven't heard that from Obama. All I hear is that he wants
to change directions. Whenever I hear somebody say "Anything's better
than what we have now!" I get very, very nervous, because it simply
isn't true. I can think of many figures through history that would have
been worse for the country than George Bush has been. While I don't care
for the job Bush has done, I still think Gore would have been worse, and
Kerry worse yet. I made my decisions in those elections, and I stand by
them.

There's at least one thing that Palin has going for her. She has a child
with Down's Syndrome, and she knew about it early enough in the
pregnancy to have it terminated. That would have eliminated the
difficulties in raising such a child before they happened, yet she chose
to have the child anyway. That shows an ability to face the tough
life-and-death decisions, and the willingness to accept the consequences
of making those decisions. John McCain has also faced life-and-death
decisions, during his military service. If either Democrat has faced
such decisions, it hasn't come out yet as far as I know.

TJ

McCain's Age...
 

TJ wrote:
hk wrote:
TJ wrote:
wrote:
On Fri, 29 Aug 2008 21:14:13 -0700, CalifBill wrote:


Actually is not obvious at all. Obama has no, zero, nada executive
experience.

You are overlooking the obvious. So far, he has run a successful
campaign. It may not seem like much, but, if you pay attention,
campaigns to show how a candidate behaves under pressure, his
organizational skills, finances, etc. My left leaning bias may be
showing, but so far, I haven't been impressed with McCain's
campaign. I have been with Obama's. However, this is where the fun
starts. The next 10 weeks will be interesting. It's close. It's
relatively clean. I'm interested.

Candidates don't run campaigns anymore. That's what they hire
campaign managers to do.

Someone said during the primaries that the Presidency is no place for
on-the-job training. That sounds like something someone who has never
actually run something would say. Even Vice Presidents don't know
what it really involves to be President, though they probably are
closer to it than almost anybody else. As someone who has been an
"XO" who later became the "CO," I can tell you that until that
responsibility actually rests on your shoulders, you don't know what
it is, and you soon find out that many of the things you thought you
could do can't be done after all.

As there is no one running that has been President before, there
isn't a one of them that has any "experience." That's the case with
at least half of the elections in the history of the country. What
makes this one so different? What we need is someone with the ability
to learn and adapt, and to do it quickly, because the country might
not have the time to wait. Obama is young, and he's arrogant enough
to still think he has all the answers. McCain is seasoned, but is he
so old that he can't adapt to the situations he would face?

There is no clear choice in this election, if you ask me.

TJ


I'm voting for Obama, the candidate who has the wisdom and judgment to
make the important decisions, including picking a top-drawer running
mate.

The respect I once had for McCain declines almost daily. He's not
suited by intellect or by temperament to be president, and his
personal war experience is completely irrelevant, strategically,
tactically, and morally. He's out of touch with today's realities,
technologies, and possibilities. Frankly, he reminds me of an aging
barnyard rooster whose world has passed him by.

He's a 72-year-old man with really serious health issues, a man who
could take sick and become incapacitated at a moment's notice, and who
does he pick for a running mate? A PTA mom with no experience on the
world stage, and why did he choose her? To pander to evangelicals and
women voters.

McCain would be a worse president than George W. Bush, who quite
probably is the worst president in the history of the United States,
or damned close to it.

The choice is clear...someone like Obama who can lead us into the
future, or someone like McCain...who will give us more of the same.

By the way, I appreciate your well-reasoned post.

Thanks. I appreciate that.

But when you come right down to it, age is just a number. I'm 59, close
to the middle of the candidate's ages. I thought I was wise at 45, but I
can look back at some things and wonder what the hell I was thinking
back then. I also have known people who were old and feeble at my age
and others that were quick and vital in their 80's. It's a very
individual thing.

Before I decide who I want for my leader, I want to know where he wants
to take me. I haven't heard that from Obama. All I hear is that he wants
to change directions. Whenever I hear somebody say "Anything's better
than what we have now!" I get very, very nervous, because it simply
isn't true. I can think of many figures through history that would have
been worse for the country than George Bush has been. While I don't care
for the job Bush has done, I still think Gore would have been worse, and
Kerry worse yet. I made my decisions in those elections, and I stand by
them.

There's at least one thing that Palin has going for her. She has a child
with Down's Syndrome, and she knew about it early enough in the
pregnancy to have it terminated. That would have eliminated the
difficulties in raising such a child before they happened, yet she chose
to have the child anyway. That shows an ability to face the tough
life-and-death decisions, and the willingness to accept the consequences
of making those decisions. John McCain has also faced life-and-death
decisions, during his military service. If either Democrat has faced
such decisions, it hasn't come out yet as far as I know.

TJ


I believe McCain's age, coupled with his four bouts of cancer, make his
health a serious issue.

As for Palin's decision, I think it was the wrong one.

McCain's Age...
 

hk wrote:
TJ wrote:
hk wrote:
TJ wrote:
wrote:
On Fri, 29 Aug 2008 21:14:13 -0700, CalifBill wrote:


Actually is not obvious at all. Obama has no, zero, nada executive
experience.

You are overlooking the obvious. So far, he has run a successful
campaign. It may not seem like much, but, if you pay attention,
campaigns to show how a candidate behaves under pressure, his
organizational skills, finances, etc. My left leaning bias may be
showing, but so far, I haven't been impressed with McCain's
campaign. I have been with Obama's. However, this is where the
fun starts. The next 10 weeks will be interesting. It's close.
It's relatively clean. I'm interested.

Candidates don't run campaigns anymore. That's what they hire
campaign managers to do.

Someone said during the primaries that the Presidency is no place
for on-the-job training. That sounds like something someone who has
never actually run something would say. Even Vice Presidents don't
know what it really involves to be President, though they probably
are closer to it than almost anybody else. As someone who has been
an "XO" who later became the "CO," I can tell you that until that
responsibility actually rests on your shoulders, you don't know what
it is, and you soon find out that many of the things you thought you
could do can't be done after all.

As there is no one running that has been President before, there
isn't a one of them that has any "experience." That's the case with
at least half of the elections in the history of the country. What
makes this one so different? What we need is someone with the
ability to learn and adapt, and to do it quickly, because the
country might not have the time to wait. Obama is young, and he's
arrogant enough to still think he has all the answers. McCain is
seasoned, but is he so old that he can't adapt to the situations he
would face?

There is no clear choice in this election, if you ask me.

TJ


I'm voting for Obama, the candidate who has the wisdom and judgment
to make the important decisions, including picking a top-drawer
running mate.

The respect I once had for McCain declines almost daily. He's not
suited by intellect or by temperament to be president, and his
personal war experience is completely irrelevant, strategically,
tactically, and morally. He's out of touch with today's realities,
technologies, and possibilities. Frankly, he reminds me of an aging
barnyard rooster whose world has passed him by.

He's a 72-year-old man with really serious health issues, a man who
could take sick and become incapacitated at a moment's notice, and
who does he pick for a running mate? A PTA mom with no experience on
the world stage, and why did he choose her? To pander to evangelicals
and women voters.

McCain would be a worse president than George W. Bush, who quite
probably is the worst president in the history of the United States,
or damned close to it.

The choice is clear...someone like Obama who can lead us into the
future, or someone like McCain...who will give us more of the same.

By the way, I appreciate your well-reasoned post.

Thanks. I appreciate that.

But when you come right down to it, age is just a number. I'm 59,
close to the middle of the candidate's ages. I thought I was wise at
45, but I can look back at some things and wonder what the hell I was
thinking back then. I also have known people who were old and feeble
at my age and others that were quick and vital in their 80's. It's a
very individual thing.

Before I decide who I want for my leader, I want to know where he
wants to take me. I haven't heard that from Obama. All I hear is that
he wants to change directions. Whenever I hear somebody say
"Anything's better than what we have now!" I get very, very nervous,
because it simply isn't true. I can think of many figures through
history that would have been worse for the country than George Bush
has been. While I don't care for the job Bush has done, I still think
Gore would have been worse, and Kerry worse yet. I made my decisions
in those elections, and I stand by them.

There's at least one thing that Palin has going for her. She has a
child with Down's Syndrome, and she knew about it early enough in the
pregnancy to have it terminated. That would have eliminated the
difficulties in raising such a child before they happened, yet she
chose to have the child anyway. That shows an ability to face the
tough life-and-death decisions, and the willingness to accept the
consequences of making those decisions. John McCain has also faced
life-and-death decisions, during his military service. If either
Democrat has faced such decisions, it hasn't come out yet as far as I
know.

TJ


I believe McCain's age, coupled with his four bouts of cancer, make his
health a serious issue.

As for Palin's decision, I think it was the wrong one.

It was wrong because Palin is at the age where pregnancies for women can
mean serious trouble, both for the woman and the child that is born.
There's a close connection between Down's syndrome and age of the
mother. After 40, if memory serves, the chances of having a child with
the syndrome rise to better than one in 20. Palin must have known that
risk, and apparently was told she was carrying a fetus with the syndrome.

She shouldn't have gotten pregnant. It was selfishness. And she should
have aborted the fetus.

There's not a damned thing admirable in her decisions.

It was selfishness.

McCain's Age...
 

"BAR" wrote in message
. ..


Obama is big on words. And his big word is change. Change what? Change
from what to what? How is the change going to be effected? These questions
are never answered. With out clear direction there is no leadership. Obama
will not tell us where he wants to take us, via this change, and that
scares the hell out of anyone who has working synapses in their brain.
Obama just says follow me. Well he isn't someone I would blindly follow.


I am not shilling for the guy .... but, this type of comment is typical of
those that haven't bothered to investigate any further than listening to
speeches or watching television.

Both Obama and McCain have outlined in some detail the issues they want to
address and how. But, the answers to your questions aren't going to be
emailed to you. You have to make an effort to look them up and read, if
you are truly interested.

Obama's is he

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/

McCain's is he

http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Issues/


Eisboch

McCain's Age...
 

"TJ" wrote in message
...


Before I decide who I want for my leader, I want to know where he wants to
take me. I haven't heard that from Obama. All I hear is that he wants to
change directions.


Maybe these will help you out:

http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Issues/

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/


Eisboch

McCain's Age...
 

hk wrote:
Palin must have known that
risk, and apparently was told she was carrying a fetus with the syndrome.

She shouldn't have gotten pregnant. It was selfishness. And she should
have aborted the fetus.

There's not a damned thing admirable in her decisions.

It was selfishness.

DAMN! It is both a fetus and her baby, her child. Just as a toddler or
teenager is still her child, the fetus identifies the age of her child,
it does not mean it is not her child. DAMN!

I am just guessing that this pregnancy was one of those "happy surprises
and was not planned. A woman Palin's age had a 1 in 35 chance of having
Down Syndrome. Children with Down Syndrome have a large range of
disability and many work, get married and enjoy life as much as anyone.
Just because she knew her pregnancy was high risk, you think she
should have had an abortion?

I guess Tom and his wife should have aborted their "fetus" because it
had CP, which can be extremely disabling. CP can be substantially more
disabling than Down Syndrome. If that was the case, Tom and his wife
would have missed out on the joy of watching their child grow up and now
as an adult be a productive member of society who has and will continue
to have a positive influence on those he meets.

I guess you are suggestion we should test for any and all disabilities
and abort all "fetuses" that are not perfect. If that was the case, you
would definitely have been aborted.

You are really getting sicker by the day.

McCain's Age...
 

Top posted on purpose....

Sick doesn't begin to describe the depths of Hairy's hatred for anyone who
is not a cookie-cutter cutout of his own twisted self.

In my 71 years of living I have never encountered a more mean-spirited
person, and that includes all the weirdoes I encountered during thirty years
of law enforcement.


"Earl of Warwich, Duke of Cornwall, Marquies of Anglesea, Sir Reginald P.
Smithers III Esq. LLC, STP. " wrote in message
. ..
hk wrote:
Palin must have known that
risk, and apparently was told she was carrying a fetus with the syndrome.

She shouldn't have gotten pregnant. It was selfishness. And she should
have aborted the fetus.

There's not a damned thing admirable in her decisions.

It was selfishness.

DAMN! It is both a fetus and her baby, her child. Just as a toddler or
teenager is still her child, the fetus identifies the age of her child, it
does not mean it is not her child. DAMN!

I am just guessing that this pregnancy was one of those "happy surprises
and was not planned. A woman Palin's age had a 1 in 35 chance of having
Down Syndrome. Children with Down Syndrome have a large range of
disability and many work, get married and enjoy life as much as anyone.
Just because she knew her pregnancy was high risk, you think she should
have had an abortion?

I guess Tom and his wife should have aborted their "fetus" because it had
CP, which can be extremely disabling. CP can be substantially more
disabling than Down Syndrome. If that was the case, Tom and his wife
would have missed out on the joy of watching their child grow up and now
as an adult be a productive member of society who has and will continue to
have a positive influence on those he meets.

I guess you are suggestion we should test for any and all disabilities and
abort all "fetuses" that are not perfect. If that was the case, you would
definitely have been aborted.

You are really getting sicker by the day.

McCain's Age...
 

"Lu Powell" wrote in message
...
Top posted on purpose....

Sick doesn't begin to describe the depths of Hairy's hatred for anyone who
is not a cookie-cutter cutout of his own twisted self.

In my 71 years of living I have never encountered a more mean-spirited
person, and that includes all the weirdoes I encountered during thirty
years of law enforcement.




You think hanging around union halls had anything to do with it?

Eisboch