I'm a 50+ year veteran of political infighting and view this issue as such an “inside” issue that not a single voter will be moved to change their vote over it. Everybody knows that if the shoe were on the other foot, McCain would do EXACTLY the same thing.

And Randy, if you Google “Republican corruption and immorality” and explore the first site recommended, my very own http://LiberalsLikeChrist.Org/gopcorruption.html , you will see that there's nothing new or unique to the corruption of the last 8 years, except the brazenness of the Bush administration, as though it didh't think or fear that it would be prosecuted.

So far, sad to say, it seems to have proven correct in its expectations regarding the Democrats and the justice system. But the people appear ready to exact their pound of flesh from Republicans running for office this year.

I am particularly angered by the continuing assertions by Bush and McCain that our policies in the Middle East are working, and that the recent 'surge' in Iraq has been a success. As I see it, the Iraqis have chosen to give the appearance of calm because they are concerned about the possibility that their hated benefactors might leave a little too early to suit them. Meanwhile, in the only theater of war that legitimately targets real terrorists, Afghanistan, President Bush has allowed the situation to deteriorate to the point where we are precariously close to open hostilities with Pakistan, and with that, might actually precipitate a takeover of that nuclear-equipped Muslim nation by extremists.What then? I dread the thought that we should give a mandate to more aggressive militarism on the part of a President McCain, fearful of appearing weak.

Just because Republicans enjoy spending money on armaments and love any opportunity to utilize our very sophisticated ordinance, doesn't mean we're better able to protect the security of this nation. Terrorist entrepreneurs of mayhem have never been stronger, and we have never been weaker, both militarily and economically than we are today. Newt Gingrich commented on this subject about a year ago. He pointed out that when it was the USA vs. the USSR, the world was more tolerant of excesses by the United States. Today, we risk being perceived as a bully or worse if we rely too heavily on military solutions to problems which, with a little patient diplomacy, might be solved at much lower cost in terms of human lives and national treasure.

I believe Senator Obama understands the necessity to speak softly, but carry a big stick. I also believe he's got the brains and temperament of a Jack Kennedy, qualities which led Kennedy to sidestepped the conventional military wisdom in 1962, and thereby avoid a nuclear war. So while I regret his decision to go back on his word in this case, I remain firmly in support of electing him President in November.

I’m a 50+ year veteran of political infighting and view this issue as such an “inside” issue that not a single voter will be moved to change their vote over it. Everybody knows that if the shoe were on the other foot, McCain would do EXACTLY the same thing.

And Randy, if you Google “Republican corruption and immorality” and explore the first site recommended, my very own http://LiberalsLikeChrist.Org/gopcorruption.html , you will see that there’s nothing new or unique to the corruption of the last 8 years, except the brazenness of the Bush administration, as though it didh’t think or fear that it would be prosecuted.

So far, sad to say, it seems to have proven correct in its expectations regarding the Democrats and the justice system. But the people appear ready to exact their pound of flesh from Republicans running for office this year.

I am particularly angered by the continuing assertions by Bush and McCain that our policies in the Middle East are working, and that the recent ’surge’ in Iraq has been a success. As I see it, the Iraqis have chosen to give the appearance of calm because they are concerned about the possibility that their hated benefactors might leave a little too early to suit them. Meanwhile, in the only theater of war that legitimately targets real terrorists, Afghanistan, President Bush has allowed the situation to deteriorate to the point where we are precariously close to open hostilities with Pakistan, and with that, might actually precipitate a takeover of that nuclear-equipped Muslim nation by extremists.What then? I dread the thought that we should give a mandate to more aggressive militarism on the part of a President McCain, fearful of appearing weak.

Just because Republicans enjoy spending money on armaments and love any opportunity to utilize our very sophisticated ordinance, doesn’t mean we’re better able to protect the security of this nation. Terrorist entrepreneurs of mayhem have never been stronger, and we have never been weaker, both militarily and economically than we are today. Newt Gingrich commented on this subject about a year ago. He pointed out that when it was the USA vs. the USSR, the world was more tolerant of excesses by the United States. Today, we risk being perceived as a bully or worse if we rely too heavily on military solutions to problems which, with a little patient diplomacy, might be solved at much lower cost in terms of human lives and national treasure.

I believe Senator Obama understands the necessity to speak softly, but carry a big stick. I also believe he’s got the brains and temperament of a Jack Kennedy, qualities which led Kennedy to sidestepped the conventional military wisdom in 1962, and thereby avoid a nuclear war. So while I regret his decision to go back on his word in this case, I remain firmly in support of electing him President in November.