At best you're confusing skill with heroism. And for McCain even that wouldn't qualify.

Aaron

"For the war hero to go out with such a whimper, thanking God and blathering on about his children: how awful."

Heroism, like anything else, is contextual. Randy "Duke" Cunningham was once a hero of mine because what he did on May 10, 1972. John Glenn was a hero of mine for the lifetime that he lived up until and including the Mercury flight. (How many people know about "Project Bullet", for instance? Not many, I'd wager. He was the first guy to set an average supersonic speed across North America.) John McCain was a hero just for saddling-up every day the way he did and flying into the teeth of the most dangerous defenses in all the history of air combat.

All these assholes went into politics.

Let me just say that people like Bob Hoover, Chuck Yeager, Robin Olds, and Ed Rasimus are still heroes to me.

... to go out with such a whimper, thanking God and blathering on about his children: how awful.

From The Times
October 20, 2008

I can live with defeat, says John McCain

"Mr McCain, speaking moments after his old friend Colin Powell, the former Republican Secretary of State, had endorsed Mr Obama, said that a loss would not devastate him. He said that he had thought about it, “but I don't dwell on it”.

The Republican nominee continued: “I've had a wonderful life. I have to go back to Arizona and live ... with a wonderful family, and daughters and sons that I'm so proud of. I'm the luckiest guy you have ever interviewed and will ever interview. I'm the most fortunate man on Earth, and I thank God for it every single day.”

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/us_elections...

Marcus Bachler's excerpt from the UK's Telegraph was salutory -- Obama still falls back on soaring rhetoric of changing the world, instilling hope, America is great, we can do it, blah blah blah. Not particularly interesting or new, I thought, not particularly revealing of megalomania.

But, to be fair to Marcus, does the other candidate speak of changing the world, in so many words? In a word, no -- at least not according to the first page of a Google search on 'McCain "change the world."' The Senator from Arizona doesn't much go for such glowing, pretty, fetching phrases -- phrases best suited to a gushing valedictorian.

But another McCain does intend to inspire Americans to change the world. Cindy McCain.

Here she is quoted in a two-day-old opinion piece run by USA News. A lovely lady, devoted to helping others, to "service" and "duty." While she may not be a Megalomaniac Muslim Socialist like Obama, it's clear that she has drank deeply from the altruist Kool-Aid punch bowl, and sees service as the solution.

"There is an old saying, "If you are not part of the solution, you are contributing to the problem."

Such work not only accords with our deepest values as Americans, but also holds the potential to enhance our standing throughout the world. As first lady, I hope to help demonstrate to the world that Americans possess an inherent goodness, one that has through the decades made our globe a better place. By harnessing the spirit of service and by making the most of America's noblest impulses, we can create together a new era of leadership."

WSS

Barack Obama vows to 'change the world'

By Toby Harnden in Londonderry, New Hampshire
18 Oct 2008

"There was a carnival atmosphere among the crowd of some 4,000, who almost drowned Mr Obama out as he reached his crescendo and said: "I promise you. We won't just win New Hampshire. We will win this election and, you and I together, we're going to change the country and change the world."

Mr Obama was described as "preternaturally confident" in a gushing endorsement by the Washington Post on Friday.

His supreme self-belief has also been the target of late-night comedians. "With just 19 days left until the election, Barack Obama warned supporters today to guard against overconfidence," Tina fey of Saturday Night Live reported.

"Then he boarded Air Force One, blasted 'We Are The Champions' and shouted 'I'm King of the World'."...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/uselection2008/barackobama/32...

Here's a picture of the crowd assembled in obeisance to its Messiah, today in Missouri. Below, the syrupy, insidious lack of values, exemplified by the evul Barack Obama, in his speech to the flock. As Marcus might say, "the sky is falling." As Sandi might say, "not bad for an Indonesian Muslim vampire." One can only imagine the size of the crowd celebrating a possible Obama inauguration next January.

For those of you who can manage the icky value-denying evul of it all, I recommend keeping an eye on the nexus of socialist doom, the left-pomowanking syrupy awfulness of the Daily Kos, a central organ of the PC-leftists' well-organized agitation for 'progressive' victory.

From Obama's speech to the horde:

We meet at a moment of great uncertainty for America. The economic crisis we face is the worst since the Great Depression. As the stock market has plummeted, millions of Americans have opened up their 401(k) statements to see that so much of their hard-earned savings have disappeared.

But Missouri, I also know this. It will take a new direction. It will take new leadership in Washington. It will take a real change in the policies and politics of the last eight years. And that’s why I’m running for President of the United States of America.

WSS

"It comes disguised as syrup"

Mainstream Christian religion is about as syrupy as it gets. I'm not talking about the fire-and-brimstone fundamentalists. In an odd way I have more respect for them at least sticking to their book more sincerely, but they are the minority, the fringe. Most mainstream Methodists, Presbyterians, Lutherans, etc. present the soft, loving, accepting God. They tout Jesus' altruism while also downplaying what kernels of a sense of justice and responsibility existed in old ideas of Yahweh and hell. For most, church is a place to go for community and socializing and acceptance. Outwardly it's not a place to condemn gays or plan fatwahs, it teaches you love and morals and tolerance. Like many of the soft-n-squishy evils of the left, this is very insidious, and I think makes the battle against religion far harder than if most religious people truly were fundamentalist.

Aaron

Another important distinction between Christianity and Socialism.

America rose to its heights despite of and in the presence of Christianity.

Socialism, on the other hand, is the exact ~opposite~ of the principles which worked against Christianity to make America great. It seeks to reverse ~every one~ of the principles and concretes embodied in America and responsible for its success.

Socialism answers squarely that individualism is an illusion and freedom unimportant next to enforced State equality. Christianity also preaches collectivism, but in a way which still allos for individual proft and industry.

Socialism is WAY more of a threat than Christianity.

Anecdotally, I have met many, MANY fine Christians of one flavor or another with whom I would trust my life. I Have NEVER met a Socialist I could trust unless both eyes were on him.

Scott DeSalvo

www.desalvolaw.com
FREE Injury Report and CD Reveal the Secrets You Need to Know to Protect Your RIGHTS!

...the religious right are not so dangerous for two good reasons.

Firstly) They are under constant attack from the rest of society and the facts of reality from science and history.

Socialist ideology on the other hand is not under attack in any significant way, indeed it is accepted mainstream dogma.

Secondly) Despite believing in the bible, they consider the US constitution to be almost as holy. Many, like Palin, pay much lip service to following it doggedly and upholding the rights within.

The socialists don't respect it and want to make it more 'progressive' or 'update' it for the 21st century.

The RR are the lesser of the two evils absolutely. They at least have a code of right and wrong, the socialists just believe in a soul-destroying gray goo that is currently engulfing us all!

I reject this premise: political correctness is not exclusive to the left. I'm not even sure it started from there though it may well have. In any event, the left has no measurable lead in primacy of consciousness.

I think it does. PCness, environmentalism, Obama's Jeremiah Wright/Louis Farrakan brand of religion ... these are the commanding heights of primacy of consciousness. All bullshit and arbitrary, not to mention vicious. Conservative pragmatism consists in not having the balls or brains to confront them properly. It may be contemptible but it's innocent.

PCness started with Stalin. You can't much more left than that.

I expect JV and Casey have an original take on things. Or they have more important things to spend their time on.

Here's the part of my post I wish you'd answer:

But with leftie political correctness the enemy is much more sophisticated, clever and insidious, rather like Mr. Scherk. It comes disguised as syrup, and many of its adherents are indecent in their pomowanking crusade against values.

I reject this premise: political correctness is not exclusive to the left. I'm not even sure it started from there though it may well have. In any event, the left has no measurable lead in primacy of consciousness.

The Conservatives are saturated in pragmatism. They are drowning in it.

There is one thing in there you say that strikes a chord. The left (University professors come to mind) seems to have more than its fair share of Toohey's. But don't you see that it's the pragmatic, compromising conservatives who are delivering the power to the Toohey's? The Toohey's of the world are powerless against objective principles. They feed off of today's conservative apologists.

God is certainly not a silly notion easily disposed of. I had to fight religion off tooth and nail to rid myself of it.

Perhaps, then, I am overly-optimistic about conservatives and God because of my communist upbringing. God was always an object of derision. Moving to Objectivism didn't change that. I just can't imagine folk *not* being talked out of Him by a little serious conversation.

But you still didn't answer me about the pomowankers.

First, let me say that I am jealous of the company you are keeping in CA.

Second, the essential issue is very definitely not who wins an election between a terrible candidate on the one hand and a wretched candidate on the other. Yaron Brook is right.

Like you, I want to think that the guy with the t-shirt can be won over. But he can't be. He is a lost cause. God is certainly not a silly notion easily disposed of. I had to fight religion off tooth and nail to rid myself of it.

You're full of shit- as if the "Objectivist project" (not to agree with project) is in any way affected by miniscule comments here. Get real.

Yes, the conservatives have been especially disgusting recently, and I believe I have posted to that effect, including the time I said I couldn't wait for you to jump in and say "I told you so." But today I was answering my own question to myself. Why did I have this heart-gladdening on seeing that T-shirt? I gave you my answer, which was my honest answer to myself. With them, at least, you know what you're up against. It's the leftie pomowankers who really give me the creeps, because they slip out from under every time and commit to nothing. Just look at their exemplar right here. Here's the part of my post I wish you'd answer:

But with leftie political correctness the enemy is much more sophisticated, clever and insidious, rather like Mr. Scherk. It comes disguised as syrup, and many of its adherents are indecent in their pomowanking crusade against values.

If there's one thing I despise more - way more - than a person with the wrong convictions, it's a person with none, militantly.

I'll be seeing James and Casey tomorrow night, so no doubt will get the party line drilled into me some more. I heard Yaron Brook the other night say it didn't matter one way or the other who won this election. I still don't buy it. Doesn't make me a conservatives' apologist. Or wrong in the Big Picture stakes.

Linz, I hope you are enjoying that vodka and tonic because I have some bad news for you. None of what you say about the conservatives is true:

...these days at least conservatives are an honest, well-intentioned adversary; liberals are slimy sophists. Their stranglehold on public discourse will be complete under Obama. A McCain/Palin victory would at least give advocates of reason a breathing space, a bit more of the time that we need.

They are not honest if honesty means to live according to reality. The conservatives will drop reality like a hot potato when it suits them. How on earth would a McCain/Palin victory give advocates of reason more breathing space??!? McCain hasn't stood by a principle during this whole campaign.

I can't believe the job Bush and Bush Sr. have done to America with the help of Hank Paulson the Christian Scientist. If they represent "conservatives" (hahahah!) then no thanks. Obama and Pelosi couldn't create so many government programs in their wildest dreams.

Sitting outside just now at the home of the late Damon Lanza with a vodka and tonic (don't tell Babs) I caught sight of a fellow wearing a McCain/Palin T-shirt by the clubhouse pool over the road. It gladdened my heart. I asked myself why. The answer that came to me was that right-wing conservatism is much easier to retrieve America from than left-wing political correctness. God is a silly notion that's easily disposed of. We just need more time. Many of its adherents are decent, like McCain and Palin. But with leftie political correctness the enemy is much more sophisticated, clever and insidious, rather like Mr. Scherk. It comes disguised as syrup, and many of its adherents are indecent in their pomowanking crusade against values. I know Ayn Rand said that conservatives were worse than "liberals," and perhaps in her time that was so. But these days at least conservatives are an honest, well-intentioned adversary; liberals are slimy sophists. Their stranglehold on public discourse will be complete under Obama. A McCain/Palin victory would at least give advocates of reason a breathing space, a bit more of the time that we need.

Bachler: I actually didn't know about this guy Thompson or his views before.

-- before posting his rant, you didn't know anything about him. Cool.

Strange though that William quickly forgets the part where Thompson says that his claims about Obama may be untrue.

-- yes, the nutjob screams "Are any of these facts true?!!!! I DON'T KNOW!!!!" In other words, whatever he is screaming about, he doesn't have a clue.

Then the screaming nutcase notes that "WE SHOULD FIND OUT BEFORE IT'S TOO LATE!!!!"

Hmmm. Maybe one day he will think something like this -- "If the points I am screaming about come from the mouth of Phillip Berg, maybe they aren't credible in the first place." I mean, could he not take some time from his busy screaming schedule to fact check?

I guess not. No time to rationally examine spurious allegations. As with Scott's feeble rejoinder that we wait until the courts adjudicate Berg's frivolous crank suit -- would Scott wait until the courts judge Berg's suit against Bush/Cheney for ordering the 9/11 attacks on America, or would he do some investigation of his own?

If Marcus and Scott think the best way to 'wake up' America is to howl bullshit wingnut talking points in their face . . . I have else little to say besides, "How's that working out for you?"

Anyhow, thanks for the humourous aside -- it provides support for the contention that sloppy and hysterical outbursts harm the Objectivist project.

WSS

..that's exactly the way I mean't it. They should be shouting at them to wake up. I actually didn't know about this guy Thompson or his views before.

Strange though that William quickly forgets the part where Thompson says that his claims about Obama may be untrue.

Scott said it all with this:

More Americans SHOULD be screaming.

And loudly, like a last dying breath!

The legal process will sort out whether Berg has any merit to his claims re: Obama's citizenship.

I do not think Marcus was actually SUPPORTING the guy, but instead, sort of tongue in cheek, suggesting that the only way to get through to Airhead America is by screaming at them to make them out of their Paris Hilton-esque brain disengage.

I agree with his positions on alot of stuff and admire his courage re: almost everything he said and felt refreshed by someone exhibiting PASSION in politics.

It is unfortunate if he is prejudiced against people with different sexual preferences.

He doesn't have to be right about everything to be right about anything.

More Americans SHOULD be screaming.

Scott DeSalvo

www.desalvolaw.com
FREE Injury Report and CD Reveal the Secrets You Need to Know to Protect Your RIGHTS!

Scott DeSalvo puts tongue firmly in cheek and invites SOLO's members to listen to 'patriot' and 'hero' Scott Thompson aka Drinking with Bob, a Queens comedian known for his unusual Stan Kinnison style of delivery.

One jarring note from the hilarious rant posted by the mildly hysterical Marcus "we're all fucked in Weimar!" Bachler . . . if you dig one millimetre below the surface of the wingnut-impersonator Thompson's rant, you realize his ranting points are drawn directly from an ersatz controversy about Obama's birth courtesy of a crackpot lawsuit filed by Phillip J. Berg.

That's right -- the same Phillip J. Berg who is a stalwart 9/11 'truther.' The same Phillip J. Berg who would like to see Cheney and Bush indicted on war crimes charges for their direction of the 2001 attacks.

In other words, a nutcase.

On the small chance that DeSalvo and Bachler are actually not being ironic, perhaps the transition of SOLO from radical Objectivist site to a marginal carnival of wingnuttia may be nearing completion.

I prefer to think, however, that Marcus and Scott both subcontract their political research to Sandi and her crack team.

If Thompson and Berg are patriots and heros, I am Marie of Romania.

For another sample of Drinking with Bob's joyously pinheaded take on life, check out his song "Do you like Faggs?"

For a non-partisan take on McCain at the final debate, here's 'What Goes On In McCain's Brain #5':

WSS

and a hero. People should watch his rants.

This guy hits the nail on the head.

Scott DeSalvo

www.desalvolaw.com
FREE Injury Report and CD Reveal the Secrets You Need to Know to Protect Your RIGHTS!

...communicate with Airhead-America?

Kiwihub, you need to try to keep up.

So what you saying is you dont like Obama's Government forcing the money and spreading it around. 

Its not that you have a problem with spreading the Wealth around.  Its this issue more about the force than the principle. i.e that The force on the unwilling to pay tax.  

...hands down. He was in great form for about the first 45 minutes. Unfortunately he ran out of steam.

However, luckily for him, Obama can't raise steam. He doesn't do confrontational. The best the UK media could do to praise Obama's performance was to call him 'Mr Cool Cucumber'.

In fact it exactly illustrates one of things I intensely dislike about Obama. He's not Mr Black or Mr White, but Mr Grey.

Doesn't mean McCain will win the election though. He would need to energize the swing voters for that, and looking at his campaign performance thus far, I don't think he can.

that throughout the three debates, Obama has come off as much smoother and certain. McCain misspoke alot last night.

I still think McCain is the better candidate based on character. Both advocate different flavors of socialism, but McCain at least giving a nod and some consideration to the need to not tax those who achieve out of existence. Unfortunately, Jason is spot on in his analysis--Obama is likely going to win.

SHOULD McCain have brought up Ayers, reminded Americans what he did, and read some passages out of Obama's book about what a great guy Reverend Wright is? Should he have waged an all-out, no holds barred attack?

As satisfying as that would have been to see, would it have helped or hurt him in the polls? Those who would have been deeply offended were never going to vote McCain anyway. But I feel like the Obama campaign charges that McCain was racist deserved a direct response.

But would that have helped him in the polls? What do you think?

Scott DeSalvo

www.desalvolaw.com
FREE Injury Report and CD Reveal the Secrets You Need to Know to Protect Your RIGHTS!

"I think when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody."

Get the fuck out of our lives and our pockets!!!

Grow up Lindsay, you can do better than this. 

 “It’s not that I want to punish your success. I just want to make sure that everybody who is behind you, that they’ve got a chance for success too. I think when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody.”

•  Why is that disgusting?

"What's even more disgusting is that McCain raised it without properly demolishing it. Just as he raised the matter of Ayers, etc.."

The most depressing thing is that even if he was able to present a cogent argument on these two points he would still be crowned the loser by the voting majority. Those (rational) arguments would not resonate with the American voter. That is the biggest problem. Not the fact that we have a mediocre candidate, and that the bad guys have a great one.

Here's what Obama actually said to Joe the Plumber:

“It’s not that I want to punish your success. I just want to make sure that everybody who is behind you, that they’ve got a chance for success too. I think when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody.”

Which is of course disgusting. What's even more disgusting is that McCain raised it without properly demolishing it. Just as he raised the matter of Ayers, etc..

"I thought he was dreadful again. Two socialists going at it, with Obama being the consistent, smooth one. McCain the war hero was simply cowardly."

This is right.

- Jason

I thought he was dreadful again. Two socialists going at it, with Obama being the consistent, smooth one. McCain the war hero was simply cowardly, stammering and simpering. His best moment - "Senator Government" - was inadvertent.

I think now that Airhead America deserves what's coming, and will get, under either of them. Pity.

It was great while it lasted.

I do believe McCain is showing some chutzpah this evening. Without looking like a psychopath. Nicely done.

Jennifer