People could overlook McCain’s flaws for the same reason again – Clinton avoidance syndrome.

All these negatives are about his temper. They are all one negative broken up into several paragraphs. Is that all you have on the guy?

I want someone who can beat Hillary and Obama. I don’t want them in the White House. I don’t care if the candidate is a DINO, RINO, or what. I don’t care about keeping the Republican party pure. I care about our foreign policy over the next 4 years.

On the otherhand, it’s unlikely our flair-up with China will be over Taiwan; the respect for
democracy notwithstanding. It will probably be over the ‘Stans, which border the Moslem dominant Uighur region of Zinjiang province.

I agree with you about the State Department.

In addition, there is another commenter here, voiceofreason2, who was in the Air Force and has expressed similar concerns about the military. VOR2, if you are reading, what do you think?

The briefs that I have heard state that we need more “end strength” for COIN (Counter insurgency) operations.

These extra “boots on the ground” help to provide a safer and more secure environment which builds trust. The trust between the local government, citizens and our forces (in addition to host nation forces) yields better intel about possible insurgent activity.

I feel that the missing part of the equation with the success of the military surge is a lack of a state department surge. I think this is coming though.

Last note: I supported John McCain back in 2000 and before I was recalled back to active duty in November I and many veteran volunteers had the opportunity to talk and listen to him while his campaign was in the doldrums.

What is important to me is a the ability to reach across the aisle, a stronger military, military service, lower taxes, taking earmarks and those that write them to task, less government, and a cleaner environment.

Thank you for your response. It sounds like you believe large ground forces will be needed in many parts of the world, but not necessarily in Taiwan — so perhaps counter-insurgency tactics and the light footprint approach is appropriate in some venues.

Thus, the next question is obviously: Do you think we need a larger standing army and, if so, how do you think we should do that? A recent report suggests the US may recruit in foreign countries. What is your opinion of that option?

Finally, I’m also interested in why you think Romney is a bad choice.

1. McCain voted FOR both Roberts and Alito.
2. Obama and Clinton voted AGAINST both Roberts and Alito.

Look up the ACU vote records, while you are it. You may not like how McCain is rated the past two years, but that record is MUCH less liberal than Clinton II, and Obama remains the most liberal person in the Senate.

What, you are afraid that McCain will nominate another Souter to the high court, like GHW Bush did? Anyone look at Breyer and Ginsberg, whom WJ Clinton nominated? Does anyone seriously think that Clinton II or Obama will nominate justices less liberal than those two? Heck, Ginsberg used to work for the ACLU.

But people can vote however they choose. I just don’t understand how it advances conservatism to hand an election to Clinton II or Obama. Again.

To quote RW Reagan: “Would you rather have 50% of something, or 100% of nothing?” Heck, in this climate of the Middle East and of the Supreme Court, I would even take 25% of something over the 100% of what is facing us.

But that is me. Just one last thing: my parents voted for Perot in ‘92 because of how much they detested how the RNC was betraying conservatism by nominating GHW Bush. How much GHW Bush was betraying conservative ideals. I begged them not to do so. But they had to, and I quote, vote their “conscience.”

The result was putting Clinton I in office with less than 50% of the vote. And you know the rest. Notice that the RNC didn’t change their tune. The liberals got stronger, not weaker.

My parents don’t like McCain, but if he is the nominee, they will vote for him—because the alternative is NOT the same. It is far, far worse.

I remember my Santayana, but I pray I am wrong.

Luckily I am pretty knowledgeable on the China v. Taiwan scenario. This would be a very heavy Naval battle with a focus on Anti-submarine warfare (ASW) and Strike warfare. There would be minimal of zero ground combat since the Chinese would have to project onto Taiwan with landing craft. This would be handled by the Taiwan Military and none of our ground forces. In a since we would be playing keep away.

You would need a large ground force for continuing operations in Afghanistan possibly Iran or future operations in Central or South America.

Hey, don’t get in the way of the “Perceived Reality” that allows our conservative brothers and sisters to justify sitting out an election and handing things over to the Clintons again, or worse still, to the most liberal member of the Senate. They actually say…ah, overheated things like McCain will appoint judges just as liberal as Clinton, or that McCain is really a liberal (despite the ACU ratings).

I’m no McCain fan, but he is light years better than Clinton II or Obama.

On a more serious note, what disturbs me most about this is how people in this camp go looking for the most damaging information about McCain (and he does give them plenty of ammo), but then ignore completely how much worse the Democratic opponents are. That doesn’t seem important.

I wouldn’t mind, if they were pushing for Romney. But too many of these individuals seem invested in a Republican defeat. Because it will teach us all a lesson, I guess.

Too bad that strategy was tried in 1992. Too bad that Saint Ronald Reagan was a pragmatist, not a partisan. There is a new fictional history of conservatism that is at play here, and the facts are unimportant.

I’m getting used to the idea of a Clinton II presidency. And such a victory will not be due to Democrats. It was, again, up to Republicans to win or lose. And the conservative wing would rather have HRC or Obama than McCain.

We get the government we deserve, I guess. I can’t wait for the hue and cry over the Supreme Court nominees in 2009.

Oh well.

http://www.heritage.org/Research/features/issues/charts/Defense/Defense1_l.gif