This is not snooty elitism – it’s based on the perception that Mrs Palin’s track record is thin and that while she has real star quality her political prescriptions are vague. Sound familiar? That may have worked for Barack Obama in 2008 but Americans are likely to want much more substance next time around.

I believe this is an obstacle she may not be able to overcome by acting as a populist, virtual “backbencher”, as she is currently operating. I say this as a fan – I would vote for her without reservation and will defend her to the ends of the earth against the BS she gets every day.

I think she will be the right person at the wrong time.

A common observation of recent Presidential elections is that, in at least one crucial personality trait or important aspect, The People elect the polar opposite of the current President.

Ford – Carter: Insider – Outsider

Carter – Reagan: Sour defeatism – Sunny optimism.

Reagan – Bush(1): Idealist – Pragmatist.

Bush(1) – Clinton: Staid – Rambunctious.

Clinton – Bush(2): Undisciplined – Disciplined.

Bush(2) – Obama: Stubborn loyalty – “Under the bus”

I’m afraid that the current amateur hour is going to be that crucial aspect.  The country won’t want to give a go to another politician with a thin resume (including sadly, her resignation of the Governorship) like the last, regardless of her policy positions and how good we think she would be.

Crossposted at Effingconservatives.

Half a decade or so back, I wrote: “It’s a good basic axiom that if you take a quart of ice-cream and a quart of dog feces and mix ’em together the result will taste more like the latter than the former. That’s the problem with the U.N.”

I think he’s a bit wrong, it only takes a tablespoon or so to ruin the whole batch - but then again, it seems more like 8 parts dog stuff to 2 parts ice cream at the UN nowadays. And that’s why I like Ambassador Bolton - he sees it for the fly-infested pile of garbage it is.

And yet, the President sidles up to the soda fountain, takes a big heaping spoonful, and calls it ambrosia.

BS. Or DS, as it may be.

Crossposted (with sentence enhancers!) at effingconservatives

I’m sure they are paid by their sponsoring groups and various government agencies based upon how many contracts they write. No contracts, no money.

Based upon reporting about their GOTV activities, ACORN itself pays it’s employees almost solely on a commission basis in actual practice, if not in policy. I recall that the registrars were threatened with entire loss of pay for not getting their quota, which led to the extreme and illegal measures their employees took to get those registrations. I would not be surprised if this were the case here, leading to a culture of “get the numbers, I don’t care how or what you have to do or say” sales. And if these poor schmucks screw it up and get caught, they cut them loose without a care and ACORN says “all fixed.”

If all that is true throughout the organization, there truly seems to be an “Animal Farm” culture there. They hook them in with these lofty goals espoused in their Core Principles, yet use those very principles to yoke them to the most depraved of practices they (very) vocally deplore. I wonder how many of them are looking at their leaders and realize they are living those ominous final words of that book:

“No question, now, what had happened to the faces of the pigs. The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which.”

Wait - Fox and Friends found one (courtesy of NEWSBUSTERS).

corssposted (with sentence enhancers!) at effingconservatives

Those annoying parts of male anatomy you see dangling off of the back of pickup trucks?

They cast the mold from this guy’s stuff.

Here’s what I have noticed from your coverage: You brought in the damage control crowd to FRAME the story. Before even airing our damning Baltimore video. You know your audience would turn on ACORN if you showed them the evidence. So instead you put your competitors in journalism in the crosshairs instead of airing a blockbuster report making massive waves elsewhere.

You even trotted out shameless Clinton era apologist Joe Conason to challenge the ETHICS of our expose. Unreal.

What about the ethics of those at ACORN caught on tape trying to help create a brothel featuring illegal immigrant age range 13-15 from El Salvador?

And he gets to dictate to CNN just what is up because he did exactly what they refuse to do - afflict the comfortable and comfort the afflicted.

Hoo yah.

Crossposted  (with suitably salty language) at effingconservatives

What the? Does he think the rest of us work on HIS schedule?

We have a saying in the Navy, “If you’re on time, you’re late.”

We also know there are events that conspire to stymie the best plans of mice and men. We accommodate with the “five minute rule” - We’ll wait five minutes, out of respect and understanding.

After that, it’s “Screw it, if it ain’t important to you, it ain’t important to me.”

Why the hell did Congress stick around sitting on their hands? He scheduled that joint session, you’d think he would have the respect for the legislators to at least be on fucking time.

Compare to the previous President. I have it on very good authority that straying from schedule was the one thing that would irritate President Bush to no end. My source said, “When something went late, for any reason, it was the only time I ever saw him truly upset. He felt that the schedule wasn’t just important to him, but that he didn’t want to have people wasting their time waiting for him.”

This guy? Center of the universe - everything revolves around him. This was a petty power play of the basest sort - your schedule depends on his.

So Senators and Congressmen, how’s it feel to be played?

Crossposted  (with appropriately more vulgar language) at effingconservatives.

All you Republican party professionals whining about how she’s messing up and ruining the Republican brand. I’m talking to you.

MAN UP!

Your party needs you. yes, YOU.

You’re professional party, right? You know what’s needed to keep Palin from “embarrassing” herself and the party when she leaves Alaska, right? Why are you COMPLAINING to the press of all people? It doesn’t help you and it hurts the party. Don’t you understand?

Remember these immortal words - “Never speak ill of a fellow Republican”

What is your problem?

You are letting her fail, and by extension the party - she is the most visible representative of the party today.

YOU ARE LETTING THIS HAPPEN. It’s a big tent, right? Live it, don’t just talk about it. Open your arms to those “icky” conservatives - they’re still part of your coalition, whether you like it or not. They might “open up” a little bit if you didn’t take them for granted at the same time you hold them in disdain.

Offer your services if you think she needs them. It can’t hurt. It will pay dividends by stopping the bleeding YOU are allowing by letting (abetting) a loyal member twist in the wind.

I don’t care if you like her, personally or professionally. But you are hurting other candidates across the country by letting this go on.

WE CANNOT AFFORD TO LOSE THIS WOMAN, SHE FIGHTS.

NEW YORK - Jon Stewart hammered Jim Cramer and his network, CNBC, in their anticipated face-off on “The Daily Show.”In an interview taped Thursday afternoon that went far beyond its allotted time, Stewart repeatedly chastised the “Mad Money” host and CNBC for putting entertainment above journalism. He also accused the financial news network of wilfully ignoring corporate dishonesty.

The mind boggles, the jaw drops. I got nothin’. You?

(emphasis mine and H/T Brietbart.com via Big Hollywood headlines)

I want a Republican who understands that cutting federal spending and not raising taxes is key - like McCain. Earmarks as they are should be a thing of the past - if a Senator or Representative wants a project for his state or district, then it should be its own legislation, let it succeed or fail on its merits.

I want a Republican who understands that business AND labor can’t survive without the other and they both are what drive the economy and a standard of living envied and imitated across the world.

I want a Republican that understands that corruption will not be tolerated at all in government.

I want a Republican who understands that a broad tax base with low tax rates is the key to prosperity.

I want a Republican who understands that life is sacrosanct - at the beginning and at the end.

I want a Republican who understands love and Marriage crosses many boundaries - but that it can’t cross the establishment clause.

I want a Republican that will support the Democrats when it is right and oppose them when it is wrong, not sell their vote for dubious advantage.

I want a Republican who will stand for their heartfelt principles, even if I don’t agree.

Heck, I want a Democrat who meets the above!

Barack Obama has been elected as the next President of the United States. I wish him well, his road will not be easy. It is now our job to help him execute his duties for the betterment of the American People.

Personally, I oppose many of his established positions, and I am suspect of what is to come. However, he will be my President and literally my Boss. I will support him as CINC. I will go where he tells me. I will do what he wants me to do. HE WILL BE MY COMMANDER IN CHIEF.

That said, as a citizen, I will support him when I think he is right, and oppose him when I think he is wrong. I will do my best to ensure he represents us all. I will lose some, I will win some. The Republic will go on. We will make sure it survives - as we always have. It is not dependent on one man no matter how powerful, but every citizen.

The people have spoken. We shall stand behind him, or we shall perish.

God Bless America.

I posted this in a diary on the 4th. I received a lot of replies to the effect “he’s not MY president, I won’t have anything to do with him.” I disagree with that for many reasons, the least of which is that is exactly how the left treated George W Bush.

Regardless of whether we voted for him or not, he has been elected President. We all own that decision now (no matter how close the final tally), and it is up to us to make it work for everyone.

When I say we shall stand behind him, I mean him as President not his person, and I definitely don’t mean blindly. As citizens we have the right to dissent (highest form of patriotism!). If we retreat from challenging him and his positions, we give up any influence. We will be irrelevant and impotent.

We are better than those who decided “this is not my America” when GWB was elected in 2000. THOSE people are only now erecting American flags because Obama has been elected President.. I personally am indescribably upset at these ” fair weather patriots”. I simply cannot count on their support when things get tough. (BTW, Seattle is my hometown, and Magnolia is MY OWN neighborhood - this cuts deep)

We ARE better than that. Don’t let the bitterness of loss become the bitter opposition. We’re better than that. This is still our country, no matter who is in charge.

Personally, I oppose many of his established positions, and I am suspect of what is to come. However, he will be my President and literally my Boss. I will support him as CINC. I will go where he tells me. I will do what he wants me to do. HE WILL BE MY COMMANDER IN CHIEF.

That said, as a citizen, I will support him when I think he is right, and oppose him when I think he is wrong. I will do my best to ensure he represents us all. I will lose some, I will win some. The Republic will go on. We will make sure it survives - as we always have. It is not dependent on one man no matter how powerful, but every citizen.

The people have spoken. We shall stand behind him, or we shall perish.

God Bless America.

He’s a US Senator. He spoke glowingly of her in one of his books. She was at one of his “taking office” ceremonies. But he didn’t lift a finger to help her despite being in an ideal place to do so, and now she’s on a deportation order. He’s a member of the same government that wants to kick her out. See the problem here?

And he said, “I’m a strong believer you have to obey the law.” He helps make the law, and a Senators endorsement goes a long way towards legal alien and citizenship status. I wouldn’t even have a problem with it, she’s family.

“I am my brother’s keeper, I am my sister’s keeper.”

Apparently that doesn’t extend to his father’s sister.

How exactly is he going to help me if he can’t help his own family?

Chief Petty Officers are the career enlisted professionals of the Navy since 1893. Their job is to get the job done, train their Sailors, and grow the junior officer assigned to them. Generally, they don’t have a college degree, but they have learned through experience how to deal with the people in their charge, and those assigned above them. In essence, they have learned leadership in the crucible of underway deployment, war, and the camaraderie only known as “shipmate”. They take pride in “knowing their people” and going the extra mile and taking care of their Sailors. They are truly the “backbone of the Navy”. One of their jobs is to teach and train the officer assigned to them in the fine art of leading these, well, kids. A good officer will observe their Chief and see how he deals with his people. A good Chief will make the officer pay attention.

John McCain was Navy royalty, as far as that goes. He was fortunate to have a good Chief find him early, it made him a better officer and man. He recognized this debt tonight and it shows his humility and leadership to acknowledge it. We are all the better for it.

FCCS(SW/AW) Jeff Weimer, USN

(Yes, I’m a Navy Chief Petty Officer)

I’m going to take this one head-on. Jeff, take a look in places other than left-wing blogs or even the MSM.

(Jeff the commenter is in bold)

What most people have not notice or fail to notice is that “Change” is coming in this election. But the “Change” is not only being promoted by Obama’s campaign since the beginning, the “Change” is now also in McCain himself, who has seemed to have made a 180 degrees turn in his own transformation. Here are the “Changes” of McCain —

1)McCain was previously against oil drilling in ANWR, Alaska; off the coast of Florida; off the coast of the Gulf of Mexico; and off the coast of California. Now he is for “drill baby drill”.

In answer to this, it’s reasonable to assume that after oil reaching $145 per barrel, a reexamination of priorities was in order. In contrast, Barack Obama openly thought that the high oil prices were just fine, except “they rose too fast”. His proposal would do nothing to ease prices on the oil market – and is fully in line with current policies concerning oil production, which by definition, is not change.

2) McCain was against Federal regulations of America’s largest financial institutions like Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and AIG. Now, after these financial institutions are collapsing, he is promoting Federal regulations to control them so that this crisis will not happen again. He now wants more Federal regulations of Wall Street altogether. Wouldn’t this be considered as socialism that most conservatives do not want?

The President in 2003 and McCain again in 2005 attempted to reform oversight of the FMs, and were stalled in the Senate by Chris Dodd and in the House by Barney Frank. They attempted to rein in the risky lending practices that led directly to this. It wasn’t deregulation that caused this, but direct regulation from Congress to banks and mortgage lenders that restricted their ability to expand unless they could prove they weren’t redlining – they were REQUIRED to loosen their lending rules. My caveat – it was a noble goal, home ownership is one of the single best ways to stabilize shaky communities, and the low crime rates of the last 10 years could be seen to bear this out, in part. The overwhelming majority of these risky loans are still being paid on time, so the idea of relaxing the lending rules was a good one – Bush endorsed it with this “ownership society”. It just went too far and caused the bubble and speculation and predatory lending and let the Democrats in Congress fight any attempts to keep it from the edge.

Also, please do not forget McCain’s past involvement in the Keating Five as an example that his future plans for Federal regulations of financial institutions will not work —

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keating_Five

From your Wikipedia article:

Democrat Robert S. Bennett, who was the special investigator during the scandal, suggested to the Senate Ethics Committee that it pursue charges against neither McCain nor Glenn, saying of McCain, “that there was no evidence against him.”

And McCain went on to author the McCain/Feingold campaign finance reform bill. Not that I’m a fan, but it shows he learned a lesson and APPLIED it.
BTW, some of the transactions that happened last week, BOA buying Merrill Lynch for example, couldn’t have happened without the repeal of the Glass-Steagall act in 1999. Deregulation at its finest.

3)McCain has said over and over that, “the fundamentals of our economy are strong” in reference to our economy. Now, he states that he was referring to the American workers as being the backbone of our economy? This reference is only made after Obama has contested his refusal to accept that our country is in a financial crisis. Maybe this is McCain’s way of defusing his stance of denial.

In a sense he’s right, this is a fiat economy. Meaning, our confidence in it undergirds its success to a significant degree. This is also a credit crisis as of now, but not a general economic crisis yet. It has tied up so much money that it could spill over into the rest of the economy. He may have understated it some, but Obama is grievously overstating it to score political points and whip up support.

4)McCain has stated since the beginning of the Republican campaign that he will fight a good and honest campaign without resorting to dirty politics of using smear tactics. Now, most of the McCain’s campaign ads against Obama are smear campaigns that even The New York Times, The Washington Post, The LA Times, Newsweek, and various other major news agencies have declared as false information using very dirty politics. Most of the Obama’s campaign ads have been on the defense to all of these false accusations by the McCain’s campaign ads.)

He may have pinned a tenuous connection to Raines, but the Washington Post even said he was an advisor, causing them to refute THEMSELVES. The “lipstick on a pig” flap – do you really think Obama wasn’t talking about Palin? He was too cute by half and got caught – and then whined about it. Speaking of whipping it up, how about Obama and Social Security? Even the above august publications had to call BS on that one.

5) For more changes of McCain, please look at the link below —
http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/flipflops

If you want to talk flip-flops, how about the significant number Obama has made, especially since clinching the nominations – always with a “I have always said…” He even called the surge “a success” after denying it until it was too obvious. You can’t deny reality, I guess.

He couldn’t even make up his mind (while on vacation!) about the crisis in Georgia. It took him three press releases to come around to the same position John McCain had days earlier. That’s not change, that’s dangerous.

In this election, there are in fact two forms of change. One form of “Change” is being promoted by a candidate who wants to transform this country for the better, while the other form of “Change” is being promoted by another candidate of his own transformation to capture the hearts of the American public. Which form of “Change” do we want as a country?

That’s why the change offered by McCain/Palin is truly better change than that offered by Obama. They fought – publicly – with their own party on issues they could have just gone along with. Palin even quit her partisan job to blow the whistle on corruption in her own party. McCain almost lost this race in the primaries due to his stand on immigration – in distinct opposition to the mandarins of his party. Oh yeah, he literally rammed the surge down the President’s throat, and Bush TOOK it… Now THAT was change even Obama couldn’t deny. Questions, what has Obama done in opposition to his party, based on principle? When has he brought change to the Democrat party?
Oh yeah, McCain wants to change government and how it works, Obama wants to change America? Wouldn’t that take a new Constitution? What would it look like?

That’s the latest from the Left and their attempt to reduce the election to slogans. Susan Sarandon used it just yesterday. If she were as learned as she purports to be, she wouldn’t have said this.

It sounds good on it’s face, and makes a great bumper-sticker slogan, and sounds true to those who are only passingly familiar with Catholic and Christian doctrine.

Jesus was NOT a community organizer, he was the leader of a movement. The largest and most far-reaching of movements the world has ever seen. It has only been rivaled by the movement started by Mohammed, yes, Mohammed.

Community Organizing, as practiced by Barack Obama and his group in the mid to late 80’s stressed that the organizer NOT be the leader of the group he was to organize. He was to find a charismatic member of the group and he was the spokesman for the aggrieved. The organizer’s job was to assemble the group and give them direction towards obtaining some concession from the powers that be. That way, it appeared that it was a grass-roots organization assembled to right some wrong or fix a problem. It, in reality, is a synthetic, or manufactured organization. I’m not trying to discount the help that many community organizers have given to their communities - many are legitimately trying to help the communities to which they’re assigned. It’s just that they’re not a part of the community or fundamentally responsible to those communities, but to their employer, who may have their own agenda.

An analogy: If Jesus had his own community organizer, they would not be one of the Apostles, they would be an anonymous disciple sent by a sympathetic group who wanted to overthrow Rome and Herod, the organizer would constantly come to Jesus with ideas to help the cause. “We need to do something to bring attention to our cause. Let’s go to the Temple and cause a ruckus!” “Jesus, you need to do something to show you’re the Savior, feed these people!” “You need to go to Jerusalem this week, it’ll make them listen to you!”

What would you think of the Passion if it weren’t Jesus idea to go in and face Pontius Pilate, but the idea of an “organizer” not working with his Apostles, but for another group interested in gaining influence or money from the Romans and Herod?

It would be no movement at all.

It sounds good on it’s face, and makes a great bumper-sticker slogan, and sounds true to those who are only passingly familiar anymore with Catholic and Christian doctrine.

Jesus was NOT a community organizer, he was the leader of a movement. The largest and most far-reaching of movements the world has ever seen. It has only been rivaled by the movement started by Mohammed, yes, Mohammed.

Community Organizing, as practiced by Barack Obama and his group in the mid to late 80’s stressed that the organizer NOT be the leader of the group he was to organize. He was to find a charismatic member of the group and he was the spokesman for the aggrieved. The organizer’s job was to assemble the group and give them direction towards obtaining some concession from the powers that be. That way, it appeared that it was a grass-roots organization assembled to right some wrong or fix a problem. It, in reality, is a synthetic, or manufactured organization. I’m not trying to discount the help that many community organizers have given to their communities - many are legitimately trying to help the communities to which they’re assigned. It’s just that they’re not a part of the community or fundamentally responsible to those communities, but to their employer, who may have their own agenda.

An analogy: If Jesus had his own community organizer, he would not be one of the Apostles, he would be an anonymous disciple sent by a sympathetic group who wanted to overthrow Rome and the current religious powers, who would constantly come to Jesus with ideas to help the cause. “We need to do something to bring attention to our cause. Let’s go to the Temple and cause a ruckus!” “Jesus, you need to do something to show you’re the Savior, feed these people!” “You need to go to Jerusalem this week, it’ll make them listen to you!”

What would you think of the Passion if it weren’t Jesus idea to go in and face Pontius Pilate, but the idea of an “organizer” not in agreement with his Apostles, but another group interested in gaining money or power from the Romans and Herod?

It would be no movement at all.

It sounds good on it’s face, and makes a great bumper-sticker slogan, and sounds true to those who are only passingly familiar anymore with Catholic and Christian doctrine.

Jesus was NOT a community organizer, he was the leader of a movement. The largest and most far-reaching of movements the world has ever seen. It has only been rivaled by the movement started by Mohammed, yes, Mohammed.

Community Organizing, as practiced by Barack Obama and his group in the mid to late 80’s stressed that the organizer NOT be the leader of the group he was to organize. He was to find a charismatic member of the group and he was the spokesman for the aggrieved. The organizer’s job was to assemble the group and give them direction towards obtaining some concession from the powers that be. That way, it appeared that it was a grass-roots organization assembled to right some wrong or fix a problem. It, in reality, is a synthetic, or manufactured organization. I’m not trying to discount the help that many community organizers have given to their communities - many are legitimately trying to help the communities to which they’re assigned. It’s just that they’re not a part of the community or fundamentally responsible to those communities, but to their employer, who may have their own agenda.

An analogy: If Jesus had his own community organizer, he would not be one of the Apostles, he would be an anonymous disciple sent by a sympathetic group who wanted to overthrow Rome and the current religious powers, who would constantly come to Jesus with ideas to help the cause. “We need to do something to bring attention to our cause. Let’s go to the Temple and cause a ruckus!” “Jesus, you need to do something to show you’re the Savior, feed these people!” “You need to go to Jerusalem this week, it’ll make them listen to you!”

What would you think of the Passion if it weren’t Jesus idea to go in and face Pontius Pilate, but the idea of an “organizer” not in agreement with his Apostles, but another group interested in gaining money or power from the Romans and Herod?

It would be no movement at all.

They didn’t get more objective, however, they just stop being hysterical about it. They went back to where they were before it all started, not blatant but subtly slanted to disfavor McCain/Palin. Case in point HERE - a recent AP article about earmarks vis a vis Palin and Obama. The story mentioned the $1 Billion he’s requested, but highlighted last year’s per capita earmarks for each, $295 for Palin, $25 for Obama - something not brought up before. That leaves the reader with the impression she’s disingenuous about the subject. It also somehow doesn’t mention at all the fact that McCain has NEVER requested an earmark in 28 years in elected office, and Obama only stopped (with much fanfare) when he began his campaign last year - and we want to compare apples to apples anyway, right?. It’s all very objective on it’s face, but these articles somehow always leave the impression the GOP is in the wrong. You can almost understand why we feel we have a legitimate beef with the press on the subject of fair and accurate reporting.

I hadn’t seen Obama’s response on TV. It’s easy to miss, as I record a lot and watch on weekends, so I could have missed it. So I went to Obama’s youtube channel, figuring they’d have it there.

This is what I found searching “mccain congratulations ad” : http://www.youtube.com/profilevideos?user=BarackObamadotcom&searchquery=mccain+congratulations+ad&search=Search

It tried every combination I could think of, even just mccain, congratulations, convention, republican. I browsed through all 1228 videos on the site. Nothing was there, as promised by David Pluffe, Obama’s campaign manager.

I am a Republican. I was probably going to vote for McCain by default. But I’m not THAT strong a Republican. I was looking for a reason to vote for a candidate, Democrat or Republican, not against one, and Obama has many things about him to recommend. I WANTED to like him.

The last two weeks of conventions and speeches and actions have solidified my opinion and position, and these two links are but one stark example of why. It’s not the candidates laundry list of kitchen table positions on everything from unions to abortion to gun control to school reform to just who is going to make you better off and win the war on terror and bring back our standing in the world. It’s the measure of the men and women in this race. The more I have looked into the records, and the history of the people in this race, I have found Obama, Biden, and the people with whom they surround themselves wanting. They do not have integrity and they do not have my vote.

Now, I follow politics like most people follow football. I find it fascinating. But until now, I’ve been an interested, if somewhat partisan observer, but not an activist. I’m not even registered with any party. That has changed. For the first time, I have donated to a political campaign of any type.

McCain/Palin ‘08

For me the choice is now clear. For everyone else across the political spectrum you I suggest you look very closely at all the candidates and the people that have influenced them throughout their lives, and then let your conscience be your guide.

Jeff Weimer

Obama was wrong about the surge while McCain was right, but by and large I think the case could be made (but not by me!) that Obama is by far the more thoughtful and reflective of the two candidates and far more disposed to listen to a range of advice. My guess is that he would have a broader and arguably better decision making proess than McCain. It’s only at the moment of decision that he worries me - I don’t know if he was trapped by lefty advisers, lefty instincts, or lefty pandering but he was wrong, wrong, wrong on the surge.

His analysis also contains the seed of an argument that in my opinion is devastating to Obama - even more than being wrong on the surge. His decision making process and personal thoughtfulness may very well be admirable and superior, and it is entirely appropriate for a member of a deliberative body, for that is ideally what they do, collectively hash out issues and legislation by looking at every angle to create (mostly) acceptable product.

It is not, however, the ideal decision making process for a single executive, whether in business or government. It is the ability to quickly analyze a situation, sometimes without all available information or everyone’s opinion, and, most importantly, MAKE A DECISION and stick with it for as long as necessary.

It’s a principle of leadership. The Marines put it succinctly: any decision NOW is better than the right decision later.

Tom’s first worry about him is the appropriate focus: can he make a decision? Can John McCain? The Russia/Georgia situation and their reaction to it is the ideal situation to examine this, as foreign relations is a sole responsibility of the President.

The answer we tell ourselves should direct our judgement for whom to vote this November.

My theoretical response (it’s not much - not too much to work with):

Any governor has the same responsibility and authority of any government primary executive to send their fellow citizens in harm’s way. Granted, a Governor does not send her army into battle, but they still send them into very dangerous situations, as we have seen after numerous natural and man-made disasters, such as Hurricane Katrina and the 1992 LA riots. As part of that, these executives have the moral imperative and constitutional authority to ensure their troops are properly led, trained, and equipped, if only to ensure their safety in these dangerous situations. Governor Palin, it’s true, did not have a passport before becoming Governor. However, one of her first actions was to obtain one and visit her fellow Alaskans on the front line in the war on terror. It’s what Presidents and Vice Presidents, and Governors - no, it’s what True Leaders do when they are concerned about the welfare of fellow citizens in their charge. My question to you, Campbell, since this issue is in the air, what has either candidate on the Democrat ticket done that has shown the same concern?

Here’s my rationale for this is so thin (despite the lofty rhetoric):

Any senior ENLISTED Sailor, Marine, Airman, or Soldier, that is E-7 and up, would look at the above paragraph and say “It’s a frickin’ JOB description, just what has she done other than merely show she ‘cares’? Has she made a measurable impact on their fighting ability? Has she done anything to improve their battle-readiness? after all, they’ll fold into the regular Army soon enough for a tour in Iraq or Afghanistan. Has she let them merely drill, or has she sent them on meaningful missions that will have a positive impact on their ability to meet their core missions? If not, this is BS, put her fitrep at the bottom of the pile.”

If she can answer that to the noncoms (who really give a damn about such things on a daily basis), she’ll have no problems with the MSM, sho mostly don’t have any meaningful military experience. Of course, they largely don’t understand the jobs involved, just the prestige, so the job description above will set them on their keister anyway.

Campbell, don’t ask the question if you can’t understand the answer….