News Barack Obama vs John McCain: Can Dems Avoid Defeat?

[turbo]

One thing missing from this discussion is how incredibly dangerous service on those small boats was. My HS girlfriend's older brother was a non-com on one of those boats, and they lost crew-members to ambush several times. Those rivers were bordered with lush vegetation and a place that they traversed without incident one day could be a hell-hole of enemy fire the next. I was not in favor of the Vietnam War, but the men who felt the duty to serve in it (especially in very risky roles) have my undying respect. BTW, My GF's brother was a bully and an arrogant jerk during our time together in the Boy Scouts and in school. I still respect his service.

One of my former co-workers was a Navy Seal who served as a forward observer for naval gunnery. He was inserted into hostile territory, conducted surveillance, and called in fire from the big battleships. Eventually, the NV forces would start to figure out where he might be, and start searching. He'd scram out of there, after calling in fire on his own position. He was one of the most quiet, unassuming men I have ever met, and he only told me of his war-time experiences after working together for months, and then usually only on our quiet lunch-breaks on the midnight shift.

I wouldn't care if either of these guys got a Purple Heart because they caught a small piece of shrapnel that required only a bit of antibiotic salve and a band-aid. I've heard that my former co-worker was highly decorated, but I didn't feel entitled to ask and he never volunteered the information.

 

[BobG]

Obama is a much stronger candidate than Kerry. Kerry's record on the war was not at all impressive when you look at the total package, which included his extremist anti-war views and associations at the end of the war. The handful of relatively minor medals he got could not possibly overcome that.

Even that aside, Kerry was at best a mediocre candidate. He wasn't charismatic, he looked unhealthy, and he did not inspire confidence or inspiration. Bush won a battle of the mediocres.

Both Obama and McCain are probably the strongest candidates we've seen in my lifetime. Either would defeat any of the candidates the other party has put up in the past 30 years, with the possible exception of Reagan.

I agree. Whichever side wins, history is made.

This is looking to be the most fun election in my lifetime. I've never seen an election with two good candidates before. Usually, the only reason elections are close are because both candidates suck.

100% of the enlisted men who served under Kerry support his decorations and his heroism. Yes that is 100%. I take that as A LOT more credible than some officers who didn't speak up at the time and now suddenly have found Jesus.

Ok. I made a fat target for you. But it has to be enlisted men who were actually serving under him. Not like the swift boat officers who were miles away from him when any of this happened.

Actually, one of the Swift Boat officers, John Clayton Lee, won a medal in one of the same battles that Kerry won one of his. On the other hand, Lee didn't feel either his or Kerry's medals were undeserved for that particular battle. Lee's beef was the cheap medals Kerry won in other battles - battles Lee wasn't present at.

And one of Kerry's crewmembers, Steven Gardner, was one of the Swift Boat Vets, but he was a crewmember at a different time period than the period that Kerry won his medals in.

Your point is still valid though.

The whole Swift Boat Vet commercial series was something that was condemned even by many Republicans, including, and perhaps even more strongly, by John McCain.

 

[Gokul43201]

Gokul, on matters of policy and such I certainly feel that staffers speak for their candidate. But I do not hold the candidate personally responsible for every little quip.

Do you not think that we need to differentiate between "Putin said &&&" and "A guy on Putin's staff said &&&"? At the very least for the sake of clarity?

I agree there's a difference, particularly if it is one member of the campaign that goes off on his/her own and says something that is counter to what the campaign stands for. But when it comes out of more than one campaign spokesperson, and looks more like campaign strategy than loose cannonism, then you must hold the candidate responsible, mustn't you?

When we speak of what Obama or McCain have said during the campaign, we are really talking about what their campaigns are saying. You can't just let your campaign staff and advisors do the dirty work for you and expect none of that dirt to stick to you.