The candidates still don't get. Use the air time to tell Americans specific solutions to some of our problems at home........And don't just try to whip up support because that's all I heard.

There BS Artist's.......Pro's.......

His speech was defintley to long, but at least he got into some specfic policies. Living in Wisconsin I voted for Obama yesterday, Hillary is just uninspiring and McCain wants to continue the Bush Doctrine in foreign policy.

Mccain said last Chrismas that the troops on the border shouldnt get presents becase it would takr their mind off the mission, hillary is anti gun, well Obama is lookin good for President to me.

A couple of points in response to that (and some not related to what you mentioned...lol sorry):

1. In his defense, he did mention a few specific goals/plans that he had: he mentioned the plan to bring down health insurance costs for the family making $75,000 or less, and to cut health insurance in half for senior citizens making less than $50,000 a year. (He didn't lay out his specific approach as to how to do this, although he has before...it involves integrating disease management and efficiency tactics across regional health networks in order to decrease unneccessary costs. On this particular issue, I'm skeptical). He also mentioned his college voucher plan where students could receive $4,000 towards a college education in return for community service. The one other big point which I can recall off the top of my head was, obviously, the war. He reiterated his rhetoric that he would end the war as immediately as possible ("in 2009"). Related to this was his strong approach towards speaking with all world leaders face to face in order to appropriately resolve world conflicts.

2. Until he gets the primary a bit more under control, it still makes sense, politically, for him to rely more on enthusiasm and broad generalizations than specific policy points. He needs to stick with his momentum because he is still neck and neck with Clinton.

3. His speaking style was noticeably worse last night than in previous appearances. On multiple occasions, he seemed vacant and searching for words. I'm not sure if it's the fatigue getting to him, or what, but it was a troublesome sign. He'll need more charisma than that to pull off PA, TX and OH.

I like Obamas idea to make more employers shell out health insurance, companies providing it in bulk means cheaper prices and better coverage. Much better than Hillary wanting to force individuals to buy it which would be more expensive and a big strain on those below the half;^]

The worst mistake in the history of the world as we know it!!! Anyone who voets or voted for Obama is a moron. He has no policies and the black population can't even get there own lives figured out with all the drugs, gangs, crime and rap music so how is some black guy going to run our country? He will run it like the black man he is, like an idiot. And he will run the country like every black person in america, hating the white race. Because our ancestors owned slaves they hate all whites, get over it!!!!!!!

Wow, streotyping the black community then cry of a stereotyping of the white community..lol Dam, it's black history month too;^[

Paragraphs like that above are the reason that I'm extremely worried for this country's future. Your lack of reasoning and your stereotyping are both utterly astounding. Please take your vitriolic ignorance somewhere else where it won't be looked upon as idiotic. Perhaps a KKK meeting.

Put OBAMA in there he is the only hope left. Don't worry about that he is BLACK!! When we all eventually become invisible(dead)(leave the body behind)(shell) And our spirit and soul goes into the next dimension, do you suppose Obama will be black then????

Lindyy,
His assertion isn't that he will force other nations to talk with him. Quite the contrary, he is contending that it is wrong to deny them the right to bilateral talks, as we have done under the Bush administration with North Korea and Iran, to name just two of the many, when they have explicitly expressed interest in talks.
I don't think that he intends to avoid aggressive action when necessary..I think that he believes it needs to be the secondary option.

I disagree that McCain's time as a POW will make him any better at understanding the goals and objectives of current terrorists. I don't see any relevant correlation. I'm sure it made him stronger as a person, but nothing to do with terrorism...particularly in its contemporary form.

Lastly...you wrote:

"And, even JFK had to get tough with Cuba. Castro sure never sat down and talked with us. JFK had to resort to tough action. "

Can it be seriously contended that the Bay of Pigs disaster is a positive reinforcement for the use of force? I agree with your point that force is sometimes necessary, but not in a botched situation like that.

Here is the fear of the white supremists in our country or at least most of their fears.

Prejudice dejour anyone???!!!!

Actually being a POW kind of takes from his objectivity in my mind, he may be a little over the edge with the idea of "get em" instead of being objective and thinking things through, don't you think?

Sox:

On the Bay of Pigs, you may be right.

1. But on North Korea:

Arms Control Today
January/February 2006
North Korean Nuclear Crises: An End in Sight?
Bong-Geun Jun

"After 25 months and on-and-off negotiations, the six-party talks finally produced a milestone joint statement on September 19, stipulating goals and principles leading to the denuclearization of the Korean peninsula. Yet, as the failure of a subsequent November round to achieve significant progress makes clear, this is only the beginning of another long journey full of surprises and uncertainties.

As the parties participating in the talks with North Korea—China, Japan, Russia, South Korea, and the United States—seek to move forward, they must take heed of the disappointing history of nuclear negotiations (see sidebar). Occurring every few years since 1991, these nuclear negotiations show a clear cyclical pattern. First, there is a crisis, then there is an improvised and incomplete nuclear deal. Then, the deal collapses, and another crisis erupts."

Sox:

I thought you were aware of the 'games' North Korea has always played with the nuclear negotiations. They do this to get something they want, settle down, then start up again. With them it has always been basically a game of 'bluff.'

But the above quote shows that President Bush has had the USA involved with 'talks' with North Korea.

There were numerous other articles, but I do not think I need to put them all here.

2. What HORRIFIED me was when Obama spouted off to Australia's Prime Minister regarding the Iraq war.

First and foremost, let me state, Australia is one of the USA's strongest allies. For someone of the low political status such as Obama, who is a mere senator of 2 or so years to talk like he did to our strong ally, was pure stupidity and certainly exhibits the fact the Obama does NOT know how to handle foreign affairs, much less how to handle terrorism.

"CANBERRA, Australia (CNN) -- Australia's conservative Prime Minister John Howard said Sunday that victory for Democratic Sen. Barack Obama and his party in next year's presidential election would be a boon for terrorists.

"If I were running al Qaeda in Iraq, I would put a circle around March 2008, and pray, as many times as possible, for a victory not only for Obama, but also for the Democrats," Howard said, speaking on "Sunday," a TV show on Australia's Nine Network.

(Sox note this) March 2008 is when Obama has said he would bring U.S. troops home from Iraq, according to legislation he introduced in the Senate. (Well, March is next month, and he INTRODUCED LEGISLATION in the Senate as to this.)

Obama, who represents Illinois in the U.S. Senate, declared his candidacy for the Democratic presidential nomination in a speech on Saturday in his home state. (Obama makes his announcement Video)

Howard -- who faces reelection this year -- is a staunch supporter of President Bush and committed Australian troops to help the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in 2003.

THIS IS WHAT HORRIFIED ME:

Obama, campaigning in Iowa, told reporters Sunday he's flattered that one of Bush's allies "started attacking me the day after I announced (his presidential run) -- I take that as a compliment."

The Democratic presidential hopeful said if the Australian prime minister was "ginned up to fight the good fight in Iraq," he needs to send another 20,000 Australians to the war.

"Otherwise, it's just a bunch of empty rhetoric," Obama said.

OH MY GOD, Obama bad mouthing an ally?? NOT a good way to 'sit down and talk.' Especially from a 'nobody'. I do not think even Clinton would be that stupid.

Lindyy

what planet did you grow up on?????????????????I think your watching waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay to much t.v. get a life!

All of that long-winded citing was for naught. I specifically said, as Obama has specifically said, that the diplomacy needs to be bilateral. The fact that multilateral talks have failed shows little to me about much of anything. It is a basic issue of respect...the US is refusing to give any creedence to the power of any nation by refusing to sit down and speak one-on-one.

I'm with Obama on the Australian PM too. For a country with under a thousand troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, it seems awfully hypocritical to call ANYONE soft on terrorism. To me, having Howard as Australian PM makes the terrorists happy EVERY day...because apparently he doesn't care much about forcing them out either. You seem so concerned about our top ally being slightly insulted by a presidential candidate, but their status as an "ally" seems like it could use some backing up with military support. No sympathy from me here.

And I'd still like to know why McCain is better able to understand terrorism because of his POW years.

Sox:

Oh, well. Long winded? Maybe you just did not like what I said, which is OK. Not a good idea to bad mouth an ally. It is like cutting off your nose to spite your face.

BUT, if you cannot understand the fact that McCain is better able to understand terrorism because of his POW years, I am not even going to try to explain, it would be like me hitting my head against a brick wall.

But, I bet anyone on this thread who is or was in the military can out-do you any day on understanding terrorism. On-hand experience is the best tool for learning.


Lindyy

Maybe I just didn't like what you said? *Sigh* It was not applicable. I was talking about bilateral talks, and you were quoting articles about multilateral talks. It had nothing to do with liking or not liking.

I have no doubt that anyone who has been in the military knows much more about a LOT of topics than I do. I'm also not claiming that I even know anything about how to globally confront terrorists if I had the power of the executive. All I'm saying is that terrorism is fundamentally different than war. And additionally, global terrorism currently is fundamentally than war or terrorism was back in Vietnam, or any other conflict of decades past. John McCain was held as a prisoner of war...he was not privy to the plans of his captors, nor was he able to observe their planning and strategy. While I cannot discount that his experience was one of courage and valor, I seriously dispute that it had any direct effect on his knowledge of how best to intercept and thwart terrorism.

Sox:

Well, I guess we can agree to disagree.

Lindyy