With the Russian problem in front of all of us, we should review the stated plans of Sen. Obama for a strong defense strategy. These are a few statements made by the senator.
1. I will cut investments in unproven missile defense systems.
2. I will not weaponize space.
3. I will slow development of future combat systems.
4. I will institute an independent "Defense Priorities Board" to ensure the quadrennial defense review is not used to justify unnecessary spending.
5. I will set a goal of a world without nuclear weapons, (I wonder if Russia, China and Iran will follow suit.) To seek that goal, I will not develop nuclear weapons.
6. I will seek a global ban on the production of fissile material.
7. I will negotiate with Russia to take our ICBMs off hair-trigger alert, (more talk from the messiah which the Russians will fall down to please.)
These are just a few examples of a Democrat strategy to protect us. We are the danger to the world so we must disarm and then talk to our enemies. That strategy worked for the Europeans during the Bosnia conflict. I just remembered, they had to get us to actually fight the war for them. They also needed us to transport their soldiers.
I do not believe you can trust a national Democrat leader with the defense of our country at this time. They will surrender and apologize and then attempt to buy off our enemies.
Bruce Caldwell
Signal Mountain
sarmatt25@comcast.net
* * *
Mr. Caldwell, why don't you GOP people quit talking a lot of nonsense about why you hate Obama and just tell the truth, you and your people do not want a black man for President.
You had rather have an old man that is feeble minded with no real solutions for the future than to accept the fact that we have a chance to finally elect a man with real goals, new visions, a plan to leave that idiot war in Iraq that you people instigated and will probably last for another 100 years, according to your man McCain.
A man who is not afraid to take a calculated risk and to admit his mistakes when he makes one, not like your present so-called President George Bush, who, according to him, has never made a mistake.
So, please, I know that you did not vote for Harold Ford because, according to Corker, he likes white women, so go on with your nonsense about why Obama is not a good man for President and why your McBush is.
The rednecks in this part of the country will probably fall for all that, but thank goodness rednecks do not make up the majority of the population.
Harold McCoy
* * *
When our enemies wish for Obama to be elected something is wrong. Regardless of Mr. McCoy and his racially-driven comments, the truth, based on is own comments, is that Obama will be weaker on defense. Why can't the Democrats realize that every time we disagree it is not racially motivated? Democats think it is a great comeback for every time they get backed into a corner, but it usually is the result of not being able to answer the tough questions. I bet you wish you could have used that when Gore and Kerry ran for President?
In the end, we did not vote for Harold Ford because he was a sorry politician who could not be trusted.
Patrick McBride
East Ridge
* * *
So, so many issues become an issue of race, and those who don't agree with the person submitting the issue are racists.
BO doesn't show up to hold meetings of the subcommittee of which he is the chair, in our United States Senate, and those who take issue with that fact are racists.
I, or anyone else for that matter, ask what BO has done, what he has accomplished all on his own, and we're tagged as racists.
BO calls for change, but specifies none that he would make, and those who ask for specifics about what he would change are branded as racists.
A kinda white guy decides to run for political office in a district with a large black population, then he's told he's an outsider and "he doesn't look like us," but those who make those statements aren't racists.
A hangman's noose shows up at a construction site and it's automatically an act of racism, just as it is to mention the ethnicity of a gang of hoodlums who stop the car of visitors to Coolidge Park and bounce it around a little or the ethnicity of thugs who rob a couple on the Walnut Street Bridge.
It's racist to question a person's qualifications but not for that same person to turn around and say they should be elected, promoted, hired, or enrolled in a particular school because of their ethnicity rather than their qualifications. I would truly hate to have a patient come in my office and have to wonder if he or she was concerned I was admitted to medical school because of my race, rather than because I had worked my tushi off to get there on my own. That's exactly what all of the race baiters and race mongers have caused with their hysteria.
It's racist to use words such as "niggardly" (look that one up in the dictionary), insensitive to use words such as "retard" (how do we adjust the ignition timing of an automobile engine), homophobic to tell two guys to take it on home when they're playing kissy-face at the mall but okay to tell a boy and a girl to do likewise, and chauvinistic to tell a little bitty lady she won't be hired for a job that requires she sling 50 pound boxes around all day, but okay to tell some skinny little dude who has to jump around in the shower to get wet that he won't be hired for that job either.
Head docs have a word for the act of calling people what we are, ourselves, doing. It's "transference." I submit that those who immediately call up the worst are, in fact, those who are what they accuse others of being.
And it's always okay to call someone a redneck, or a hillbilly, or a country bumpkin. "And she said 'hello country bumpkin,'” now that song is going to be flashing around in my brain the rest of the night.
Royce E. Burrage, Jr.
Royce@OfficiallyChapped.org
* * *
Mr. McCoy, are you not voting for McCain because he is white? Do you agree children have no rights until they are born and it is perfectly OK to abort them anytime during the pregnancy? Do you support gay marriage? Do you support a weak military defense? Do you want government run healthcare? Do you enjoy paying more taxes?
Are you are voting for Obama because he is black? Would you vote for JC Watts or Colin Powell on the Republican ticket? If you don't stand for something, you will fall for anything, and this redneck stands for a few things.
Mr. McCoy before you paint us as racist, you might want to look in the mirror. Most of us are voting on issues and could care less about skin color.
Richard Sims
* * *
Mr. McCoy,
Quite honestly, I am offended by your letter. I found more racist terminology in your opinion than in any of the others post, "you people" and "rednecks." We do not need to resort to name calling to have a civil debate about who is best suited for president.
I have not made up my mind for whom I will vote. However, based on your argument, Mr. McCoy, it will not be for Obama. You resorted to and played the "race card." Is it not possible that Mr. Caldwell does not like Obama's policies, and it has nothing to do with his race? We cannot assume just because someone does not agree with Obama that he/she is a racist. That is very narrow minded.
I have a lot of "redneck" friends. I would even be considered one myself. However, when we talk about the upcoming presidential election (Oh, educated "rednecks" watch out), race has never been an issue.
Please, Mr. McCoy, next time base your argument for Obama on facts and not name calling. We have had enough of that in the election itself.
Mitch Doxsee
Hixson
* * *
I agree with Mr. Caldwell's remarks on Obama's defense plan.
It is for each of us to decide as individuals who we are personally voting for in this election. But, let me stress, we may not all agree on candidates, or their stance on every item they are issue in the campaign. What is important is that we all get out and vote on election day for the candidate of our choice. I encourage you all to go vote. Do not hesitate because you don't think your candidate will not make it, or discourage others from voting. It is our right as U.S. citizens to stand up for our candidate and vote through the election process.
Now, as for the "disarm" America speech from Obama: I grew up in a military environment, my dad was Army, 82nd Airborne Division, during World War II, as were most of his brothers and brothers-in-law. I grew up proud to be an American. I grew up in the school environment where we respected our elders and stood at attention with our hands over our hearts during the pledge of allegiance. I remember when we were stationed in Germany during 1963 to 1965. It wasn't too long after WWII was over. The German kids would throw rocks and chase us if we were walking between "the base" and "housing." However, we respected their country and it was still one of the greatest experiences of my life in growing up as a child. I would not trade it for anything.
I remember the 20th anniversary of D-Day. Dad had taken leave and we traveled through Germany, Belgium, and France during the month long trip. We visited Malmady, where soldiers were stood in line after capture and gunned down by the Germans. We visited the massive underground memorial at the beaches. We visited the burial grounds where over 9,000 soldiers are buried on foreign soil (far less than have perished in Iraq). The day of the anniversary, we headed for the celebration, driving through in the old Buick, we had an American flag on the antenna of the car. I remember seeing the people waving and shouting. We parked and went to hear all the speeches. General Ridgeway spoke. I remember the pride in my heart for my father's bravery during World War II. It made a real connection in my life on what my dad did for our country. I had the folder on the celebration events in my hand. The General's speech made such an impression, I had to have his autograph. I still cherish these memories to this day. I was only 12-years-old at the time.
To hear Obama even talk about drawing down the arms which are in place protecting the United States of America, puts me in fear of what will happen to our country. It will be like we are surrendering our country to anyone. Haven't we already done that enough? We are paying the high prices of oil, not charging enough in return to those same countries that depend on our grain and corn. We will be at other countries mercies.
You may not agree with my viewpoints, but I respect everyone's viewpoint, and ask you to please view the video and make your own decision.
Let's not "give away the farm" -- let's stand for something. Let's guard our borders and get back to being the United States of America, proud of where we are from, and making other countries respect what we stand for.
Our founding fathers bore the burden of making our nation free, let’s keep it free.
Bonnie T. Cox
* * *
If McCain equates to the status-quo (when it comes to military management) it is dangerous to allow him to control the U.S. armed forces. In a new era where the U.S. is no longer the undisputed military hegemony, a man who advocates diplomacy above all else is absolutely essential to world stability.
In the face of Russian threats to overtake Georgian territories and to bomb Poland, what is needed is not a U.S. leader threatening to do the same, but someone who is willing (and wanting) to negotiate with those who threaten international peace.
Obama, without question, represents a move toward a more diplomatic, less coercive form of international relations, and this is the only way that powers on equal footing can engage with one another. The other option is to come to blows in order to determine who has to be listened to, but this option is far too costly to condone.
Of course if you're a maverick, that is a person who takes an independent stand apart from his or her associates, it may not matter what the best, least damaging way to resolve such conflicts are; mavericks don't play by the rules (and boy, there is a long history to prove McCain truly is a maverick).
With the Russian bear, closely followed by the Chinese dragon throne, attentively reacting in hostile ways to U.S. demands, it is clear that the time-tested Republican strategy of 'do-what-we-demand-or-else' is nearing a tipping point, wherein the U.S. will either have to change its governing party (in order to change its strategy in relation to international relations) or back up its words.
The potential for military confrontation between Russia (and China) and the U.S. is very real. Between tensions in Georgia, Poland, and Iran (which appears to be slipping off the center stage) all of which pits the U.S. against Russia, it is obvious that the threat is very real.
But as we near closer to the U.S. election there is reason to believe that the catastrophe that would be a war between the U.S. and its allies and Russia with its, can be averted. The reason is not because of a military maverick who promises to continue Bush's war on terror and to not back down to terrorist ambitions. No, it is due change that we should all believe in, a change from military first designs to level-headed diplomacy.
Lastly, anyone who still doubts that the world is going through a political revolution is deluded. The notion that decisions about politics is strictly a white conservative discussion is changing. When African Americans respond, they respond out of the mindset that whites believe we are not a part of the political process. And when political commentators speak, it sounds like (the language used) is geared towards white America. This year you will hear the voices of women.
Jacquelyn L. Fuqua