John McCain

I found this exerpt with John McCain from four years ago. It is nice to see someone in politics that doesn't change with every new headline.

Were dinosaurs on the earth 4000 years ago?

The most important question Matt Damon can ask of Sarah Palin is about dinosaurs? He says that he needs to know her answer to this question because she will have the nuclear codes...


I don't think Matt really understood the question or the reason he asked the question.

While she was governor of Alaska, she worked to get the theory of creation taught side-by-side with the theory of evolution. Don't be fooled by the sarcastic, condescending tone in Matt Damon's voice, he obviously supports Sarah Palin, as I will explain.

When it comes to the nuclear codes and nuclear weapons, it is the privilege of this nation to hold the most destructive weapon in the world at its command. If there was ever a question about the need to use these weapons, we would want that question to be answered by someone with equity and fairness. We would want someone who looked past popular belief or opinion polls and would consider all available views.

The decision to drop two nuclear bombs on Japan was probably the most difficult ever made during WWII. It was a decision that Harry Truman had to live with for the rest of his life. He authorized the deaths of thousands of civilians, innocent people dragged into a war waged by their government in the pursuit of pride and power. President Truman had to balance these people's lives with the lives of thousands of others who might have had to die in order to end the war. Eventually, he made the decision to dissolve the lives of more than 100,000 people. History looks back and judges him both as a hero and a murderer. So be it, but they never had to balance lives as he did.

But what if the question to use the destructive power of a nuclear weapon was presented to a biased and prejudice person? What if that person only saw the world in one way, and considered all other ways to be childish, silly, or simply beneath their stature? Or what if that question came to someone who considered the definition of life to be above their right or ability to determine? The results would be devastating. If they were absolutely opposed to the use, the consequences could be catastrophic; if they were trigger happy and had no value for life, the results could be equally catastrophic. Judge for yourself who should hold the "nuclear codes." And remember nothing in this world ever has just one side.

History-making

Well, I hope you are as involved in this election as I am. I have taken the opportunity to watch some of both the DNC and the RNC. These events function as a way to display to the country the person who will be nominated for election from each of the political parties. I have read and listened to the news containing quotes and highlights from the candidates and prominent party members' speeches. I have to say that they mislead and confuse the audience against the truth, they bias and misconstrue facts! They present the views only of the journalist without bearing on the candidates, their qualities or positions. I ask you, my dear friends, why? Why do we need these journalists, reporters, and commentators? What value do they add to the story, what do they provide that we cannot possibly comprehend by reading or hearing the actual speech? If you objectively want to know which candidate most completely aligns with your views, just listen. You don't need sarcastic comments, you don't need flattering overtones, you need truth, and you need facts. Do you think that journalists want truth? Do you think they want facts? No, they want to sell! They are ENTERTAINERS!
Throughout this election, I have heard talk of making history...the first African American, the first woman, the first yadda yadda yadda...who cares? Why should we care whether we elect the first of anything? I liked the way Rudy Giuliani tried to phrase the question we should ask ourselves. The American people have two resumes presented to them, each with the names and political party removed from them. We read the resumes, interview the candidates ad select the best person for the job. It doesn't matter if that person has race, gender, religion, age, or handicap. So many people have fought to eliminate these barriers, these unfounded, unimportant prejudices. We have made great strides in accepting everyone into the American culture. Those journalists that claim history making events are perpetuating inequality. They are accentuating differences. They retreat into their on stereotyping prejudices. Again I ask, "what value do they add?" History-making...a history-making event would be to select a Congressional or Executive candidate based solely on their qualifications and not on the political, do-nothing commentators.
I have heard this Congress called the "do-nothing" Congress. I have heard our President called a "lame duck." But who is making these comments, and what value do these comments add to our society? If you want to know something, go to the source.
Don't get me wrong, media has a purpose in politics. They should keep polititians honest, they should expose truth and facts that politicians often try to blur. But the moment they begin to write commentary, they become entertainers.