Posted on 12/18/2007 12:27:01 PM PST by pissant
Edited on 12/18/2007 12:50:16 PM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]
Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), who skipped the Iowa Republican straw poll and called it a sham, re-emerged on the political scene this week with a visit to California and speech today before a veterans group in Kansas City, Mo., designed to highlight his war hero background.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
That's some "characteristics of leadership" there.
Maybe, in 2008, McCain can return the favor.
Go Fred.
Gee pissant, you really have to go around the world to connect the dots on that one.
No slur too obscure for Fred right?
We learn from our mistakes.
Well, some folks do.
I think Fred has already spoken to this matter. Perhaps not to everyone’s satisfaction, but he has not shied away from acknowledging it as an error.
I wish we had a perfect candidate we could all jump on their bandwagon.
But then, so do the dems.
I’m sure he will be on Fred’s short list for cabinet/VP
Wow, thanks for this timely article. How many times have you posted this before?
Date should be listed as August 18, 1999.
Zero times. I searched.
I see you lapping up the Rudy McRomneybee archive articles. Why not the Rudy McRomneybeeson ones?
Fred has disavowed his cheerleading for McCain in the 2000 election?
Arizona has a Dim governor and we need to keep the Senate seat, so maybe not.
Now Duncan Hunter, on the other hand, would make a good veep or a great Secretary of Defense for Fred.
Why are you SO focused on Senator Thompson and not spending all of your time fighting the liberals? I still don’t understand your vitriol for the good senator...
Fred has disavowed his cheerleading for McCain in the 2000 election?
—
for his CFR efforts.
those who dwell on the past need to be careful it obscures opportunities in the future..
I am not too concerned that Fred would want
McCain as a Veep on his ticket, and I would be tickled pink if Hunter was. That’s all.
If Hunter were outside the margin of error, I would vote for him, he would be my first choice. He’s NOT! After 30 years as a conservative in the house and I, a conservative political junky had never heard of him. Still, I researched and liked what I saw. He’s gone no where in the polls, he can’t even reach Ron Pauls coat tails so I moved to the highest polling conservative available, Fred Thompson.
I use to pray Hunter would give up and endorse Fred, but Hunters numbers are so low I doubt they would raise Fred by even a point.
Now my question is, why do Hunter fans continue to attack the only other conservative in the race that has a chance? I’m a hunter fan and I don’t do that!
I understand Rudy, Romney and Huckster fans because Fred is a threat to them and standing next to him makes the liberal stripes stand out even more, but a Hunter fan, I just don’t get it. I really hope they ban you again.
Is it “vitriol” to make his record crystal clear? That statement he said about McCain is stomach turning, is it not?
“I really hope they ban you again.”
Now that is funny. ROFL.
He is under the delusion if he beats up Fred, Hunter will surge. Quite the strategery. Been working great for Hunter, if the purpose is to alienate everyone.
Having to dig deeper and deeper...
Look forward to seeing you break out the Fred ‘08 stickers, hat and yard signs any time now ;-)
I hope they keep you around, it’s fun...
Considering all the Huckabee archives I’ve posted lately, I figgered I needed to be more fair and balanced.
In fact, I need a Hunter Archive. How’s this:
In a World of Peril, Let’s Keep B-2 Bomber
To the Editor:
Your Aug. 2 editorial alleges that the B-2 Stealth bomber is a “billion-dollar lemon.” This broadside is reminiscent of the 1980’s, when critics sought to undermine the Reagan rearmament program by questioning the idea that a high-technology military could perform in combat.
Before World War II, bomber advocates thought air defense was futile — until radar was invented. Suddenly, bombers could be detected and engaged. The United States lost 2,200 aircraft over North Vietnam as missiles were added to anti-aircraft guns and fighters. From this experience came the push for “stealth” technology that would blind radar.
Only seven B-2 bombers have been delivered to the Air Force. While some flaws have been discovered in the manufacturing process, they are being corrected and do not compromise the aircraft’s design or mission.
The B-2’s radar cannot “distinguish a rain cloud from a mountainside,” you charge. If rain is heavy enough, it will reflect like a solid object. This is true of all radar. A more powerful radar can “see” better but could also be detected by an enemy. The rain-rejecting software has been adjusted. There is no indication this problem will degrade performance.
Tests will continue through spring 1997. The Air Force has confirmed that detectability and survivability testing has been “successful in confirming expected B-2 performance.”
The 509th Bomb Wing has been putting the B-2’s through their paces. It has participated in the Red Flag combat exercises. It has been able to fly more training missions than planned because B-2’s seldom require more than minor maintenance.
On June 13 the first test launch from a B-2 of an advanced Global Positioning System-aided bomb was successfully conducted. Using satellite signals, the bomb hit within the 20-foot circular error probability.
The B-2, with its stealth capability, long range and capacity to deliver precision weapons, is unmatched. It is also the only United States strategic bomber in production.
We need to keep the B-2 line open as a hedge against an uncertain future in what is still a dangerous world. (Rep.) DUNCAN HUNTER Chmn., Natl. Security Subcommittee on Military Procurement Washington, Aug. 2, 1995
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=990CE7D71E31F937A3575BC0A963958260
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.