[basil]

It shouldn't even be a contest--McClain is the far better choice.

There are a lot of things to like about him, and about as many things not to like about him.

IMHO, any way you slice it, it has to be McLain---the other two choices are so horrendous.

The main thing to like about McClain is that he's right on the war on terror--and if we don't win that war (and we are winning it), nothing else matters.

[JSteff]

“McClain is that he's right on the war on terror—and if we don't win that war (and we are winning it), nothing else matters.”

But no water boarding or keeping prisoners awake all night.

However McCain is our best chance for the security of this country.

[norton]

"The main thing to like about McClain is that he's right on the war on terror--and if we don't win that war (and we are winning it), nothing else matters."

I've been scared a few times in the past - usually involving pain, death, or severe sartorial errors; But...

Faced with the specter of choosing between balancing support for troops in the field far away (for good cause) against support for the defense of our own lands, society, economy, and even the language, is a whole new dimension.

I'd take any of the prior scares and give change...

I'm still leaning to a Duncan Hunter write in, but 2008 just sucks!

Maybe being old is a good thing.

Welcome back Jim.