So why waste my time looking it all up, scouring the net for facts, and being a loyal, educated voter if in the end, a bunch of no it all politic geniuses are going sit around and decide I'm to stupid to make my own decision.

Besides, have you seen our candidates these past few years:

Bush: Wages war without clear expedition. Frankly, "Go get revenge." Isn't quite good enough for me. Sure there was the whole 9/11 scene but don't we need a plan of action before we go send our beloveds into a blood bath? We have one now ... Four years later.

Meanwhile back in the old U.S of A our economic community crumbles and the middle class begins to wither away. Oil prices rise and so therefore does everything else.

John McCain: Smart one that he is, can't remember how many houses he owns. Can you spell waste of nature? Or pushing global warming? Anyway fat cat has 7.

He thinks middle class is anyone earning under 5 MILLION dollars a year. Shows what he knows about today's economic world. How many of you make 4 million?

He supports Bush: Ha-ha enough said.

He plays way too many dirty angles, more than usual in campaigns. For instance he slangs this whole time about Obama's inexperience, and what kind of a VP does he elect? One no one knows and his most inexperienced choice possible.

Also the fact that she's a woman is very sneaky on his part. Hey I don't have nothing against her personally. I'm a woman. Anyway I figure He's only doing it because Obama's getting publicity for being African American so good old McCain goes and says, we'll look my VP, she's a woman. How's that for publicity. As a woman, I find t insulting because of why he is doing it.

Another thing: all those speeches of his and his followers'? Do they say ANYTHING and I mean ANYTHING about what the hell he's going to do about America? No. Just, "I'm a war hero this, I'm a war hero that, I'm an experienced geezer who can't count to seven, did I mention I'm a war hero?"

Obama: We'll now he's just plain sketchy. Something was said about him wanting to finish something in Iraq yet he apparently is getting our troops home ASAP.

He used to do drugs. Has he been like urine tested or something so we know we're not hiring a drug addict?

He made a big fuss over a lapel. IT'S JUST A PIN! GET OVER IT! He has but, jesus, he made a scene.

Hilary: Yeah, yeah no one cares anymore but still.

She was for abortion, no restrictions, just for it. That highly disturbs me, I mean according to her if two people get in a bed and go at it for mere pleasure and woops make a baby, they have no obligation to its life what so ever. Yeah I get that if they are really against the idea the kid and they won't get along so hot. But people there is life beyond age 18! Also, there is this wonderful elastic little creation, it makes you less likely to knock up your partner or get knocked up, it's called a C-O-N-D-O-M-N! Buy it. Wear it. Love it.

Yeah we'll she's gone anyway. HALILUEJEAH

So seriously, I wouldn't waste my time even if I was old enough. You want to go stand in a line for hours and choose between different idiots only to have your vote changed in an instance by our very own Electoral College, have it messed up in the machine, or have some dude pay his way in, you go ahead. I'll live MY life and make sure what I can effect, is affected.

I think it is simply about a principle of demonstrating strength in the face of attack. That is a simple schoolyard technique of dealing with a cowardly bully: when hit, hit back with devastating force so the bully will not strike again.

The radical Islamists who attacked the United States on 9/11 saw us as a soft target, especially when there was little or no response to the first attack on the towers, and the Clinton administration showed no interest in pursuing Bin Laden.

If President Bush had not responded with a massive display of military strength, I truly believe there would have been more, and more brutal attacks in our country no matter how much we strengthened our internal defenses. Personally, I would have preferred that he had taken his stand in Afghanistan after the fall of the Taliban, but perhaps after studying the Soviet's failure there, Iraq seemed a better choice.

International intelligence agencies (Great Britain, Russia, the U.N. and Israel) all confirmed the presence of weapons of mass destruction, but because the attack was telegraphed the weapons were either shipped out or hidden. From Desert Storm, the international community already knew that Saddam Hussein had and was likely to again violate the sovereignty of his neighboring countries. Likewise, they knew that he had already used WMD's against the Kurds. Hussein was a genuine bad guy who had killed on both personal and genocidal levels. He was a "good" target.

One way or another, the U. S. had to back up its potential power to destroy our enemies with a demonstration that we had the courage and will to actually use it. As the Japanese who attacked Pearl Harbor learned that wrath of this country is a fearsome thing, so the attack on Iraq, whether the official reason was to eliminate WMDs or an evil dictator, has had the effect of causing our enemies to re-evaluate the cost of further attacks. Libya almost immediately in response to the U. S.' show of strength, backed down from its former stand as a supporter of terrorism.

And that, I believe, despite what the diplomats and politicians may say, is the real reason for the war in Iraq....it was and is a necessary show of force to slow down rage-blinded fanatics that want only to destroy us, by demonstrating that it will not be as easy as they thought.

John Knows Georgia

Senator McCain is intimately familiar with the situation in Georgia and South Ossetia if his supporters are to be believed. I mean, the man's been there, people! Come on, if a guy has been somewhere and talked to a few of the people around there, he knows everything about it, right?

John Knows Iraq

Again, Senator McCain has been to Iraq several times. He's had his picture taken with the troops, walked around on the ground and knows the place like the back of his hand. He knows what's best for the Iraqis and what's going on in that part of the world because, dammit people, he's been there. Hell, he could probably even run the war in Iraq and Afghanistan without consulting his staff.

John Knows Israel

Senator McCain has been to Israel on several occasions and because of that we Americans can rest assured that simply his visits to Israel make him an expert on the subject of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. I mean, the guy has been there right?

John Knows Economics

Senator McCain knows all about economics despite having said earlier in the campaign that economics was, “not his thing”. Since then, of course, Senator McCain has visited Economicstan and now is an expert in the subject.

John Knows Dirty Politics

John knows all about dirty politics. He, of course, has been the victim of it before. Who could forget the push polling in South Carolina? But, he'd never visited there before so he didn't know about it. However, once he visited ParisHiltonabad and compared his opponent to a rock star, now he has a real handle on what it takes to get down in the mud and wallow like Karl Rove.

John Doesn't Know…

About the number of houses he owns. Maybe that's just because he hasn't been to all of them yet. Because, let's face it, a person doesn't become an expert on something unless he has, “been there, done that”.

I am assuming, of course, that everyone realizes that Senator John McCain should be even more familiar with the number of properties he owns than he is with the situation in Iraq, Georgia and Afghanistan. If he doesn't know about his own personal finances and his own personal property, do we really trust him to handle the country's finances and property?

Think about it.

Not long ago China was the object of a debate as to whether it to should be a nuclear power. Today it is an integral part of the nuclear community and an important power player in Africa regarding the Sudan and other regions. In the late seventies a country most likely detonated an atomic bomb in the Indian Ocean off the South African coast. This conclusion was based on satellite evidence. Based on these two examples, is it fair for this one nation not to have the bomb and others to have them?

Another issue is that Israel has been busy destroying nuclear development in the region since 1981. It entered Iraq space that year to destroy an installation and recently entered Syrian space to do the same. It is planning also to do the same in Iran. These countries will probably continue their research programs on the development of other energy and defence resources regardless of foreign intervention unless those populations are totally replaced or wiped out. Does this make sense?

For years to the issue of the threat of blocking oil being traded through the Strait of Hormuz should a conflict escalate there, has been fanned in the international news. I don't know how that would ever happen because even though there is such a large portion of the world's oil going through the strait, we are quickly moving away from Iran a source. I guess the US needs to intensify its presence in the region to allay fears of any possible disruption in the oil traffic but it also has to take some responsibility as being an antagonist by periodically sending military ships in the region.

The troops thoughts

Michel Brown said “ I have a child I havet seen yet and im waiting to go home. They've delayed me for the past year. The god *** goverment needs to let me go. The terriorist are gone anyway. We did them a favor of killing them but now they want us to build them air feilds and give them millions of dollers.”

Joe Ragner said “ My family has not seen me in 4 ******* years. I have seen things a man should ever see. Ive seen my best freind died in my arms. I want to go home to atleast attend his funral. He was killed by a road side bomb.”

Sanchez Remeraz said “I have killed people. Do you know what u feels like after you kill someone. Taking someones life is a sin. So that means the goverment is a sin. It is a sin to listen to the goverment.”

Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili and his Russian counterpart Dimitry Medvedev signed a truce just Monday and the UN met for the fifth time in as many days on the conflict.

Despite a top Russian general telling ABC's Clarissa Ward that Russian troops had no intentions to attack Georgia, armed Russian troops poured into western Georgia. Ward's team left the town of Gori in western Georgia shortly before Russian troops arrived. Ward reported that the streets were almost deserted, except for Georgian soldiers on armored personnel carriers screaming for foreign journalists to get out of town before the Russian bombardment began in earnest.

So what did Bush say to Putin, whom he formerly called a friend, but now seems to be turning his back on the US and the western world in general? “I've expressed my grave concern about the disproportionate response of Russia and that we strongly condemn the bombing outside of South Osettia. I was very firm with Vladimir Putin”, suggesting that Putin still has the ball in his court, even though he has handed over the reigns of the Russian presidency to Medvedev.

Vice-President Cheney offered a bolder statement: “Russian aggression must not go unanswered and that its continuation would have serious consequences for its relations with the United States”.

Responding to comments by Bush and Cheney, Putin replied that “It is a shame that some of our partners are not helping us, but essentially are hindering us. I mean…the transfer of the United States of a Georgian contingent in Iraq with military transport planes practically to the combat zone. The very scale of this cynicism is astonishing - the attempt to turn white into black, black into white and to adeptly portray victims of aggression as aggressors and place the responsibility for the consequences of the aggression on the victims”.

Saakashvili fired back at Putin saying that “Russia made clear (that) the goal of this operation is the regime change in Georgia, change of a democratically elected government. It is quite clear what is happening. We are in the process of an invasion, occupation and annihilation of an independent democratic country”, adding that “As we speak, there are people getting shot, killed”. Essentially, Saakashvili is accusing the Russian government of sabotage. Saakashvili called the Russian incursion a “pre-planned, cold-blooded, meditated murder of a small country”.

So why did Russia attack Georgia? Some of the reasons may include: the US is pushing for Georgia to be included in the UN security council & Russia has veto power on that council, Georgia is a democracy while Russia isn't and Georgia is an active participant in the Iraq war, a war that Russia vehemently opposes.

Adding to the already contaminated region, between 1,000 and 3,000 tons of DU was released during a three week war in 2003 by coalition troops. The only difference is that unlike in the Gulf War, most of this DU was released in heavily populated areas. Following the 1991 Gulf War it took about three to four years for birth defects and the cancer rates to rise so doctors and those in the medical field worry there will be an epidemic of cancer in the decade to come. In the mean time doctors and hospitals are doing their best to treat these young patients. Many of whom suffer from leukemia and tumors but supplies are low and beds are scarce.

DU not only affects children but veterans of the Gulf War and many attribute it to the Gulf War Syndrome. Before the Gulf War the U.S. noted potential health problems that both soldiers and civilians could face by being exposed to DU, but while the U.S. is now skeptical other agencies and governments, such as the UK are reevaluating the situation in Basra and other parts of Southern Iraq. DU is so deadly because it can be inhaled, absorbed into ground water and the vegetation, therefore becoming part of the food chain. DU munitions were not only used in Iraq, but Kosovo, Serbia and Bosnia with the effects all the same.

Once again, as they did during the Vietnam War, some anti-war demonstrators are trying to force our country to cut and run from something we started. Al-Qaida believes it's just a matter of time when Americans will show its lack of commitment and backbone.

Those American men, who fought in Vietnam and put their lives on the line for our country, did not deserve the horrific and disgraceful treatment that our country heaped upon them when they came home. Many years after the war, the effects still linger on in many forms, such as guilt, humiliation, anger and ruined lives due to mental and emotional problems.

There is no doubt that many anti-war demonstrators, back then, thoughtlessly, just wanted to be “part of the crowd.” Their actions and behavior ultimately caused our country to cut and run in heated battle - unthinkable behavior of our great country, the defender of freedom throughout the world!

The Vietnam War could have been won! We didn't lose; we simply allowed them to win! The purpose of the war is debatable, but our military was committed and should have been allowed to achieve its purpose. Not only did we abandon a country and its people who depended on us for their freedom, we also lost the respect of our Allies and countries throughout the world.

Almost 60,000 Americans were killed; more than 300,000 were physically maimed for life and tens of thousands were damaged in many other ways - all for naught - all in vain! Our military was not allowed to finish the job with dignity and purpose!

Think about it for a moment. These were young men who bravely committed their lives to their country. They pledged to willingly give up their lives if necessary to fight for America's interests. Most of them experienced conflict and fear beyond imagination. Many of them killed and maimed other human beings during the war and watched many of their friends in horrible pain and dying, something most American people have not experienced and seemingly cannot put into perspective. They returned home with these horrible experiences in their memories. These are not easy things for anyone to live with, but they will have to deal with these memories the rest of their lives. Our country should have helped them accept what they were forced to do, instead of humiliating them and causing them to feel guilty and alone.

It's too little and possibly too late, but our country is now realizing it made a huge mistake treating Vietnam Veterans as criminals and causing them unwarranted guilt. Americans are now trying to make amends by showing compassion for our current military personnel. Affection and admiration is being displayed in many ways, such as tying yellow ribbons around trees and such, and throwing parades when soldiers come home. We, in this great country, should be doing these things anytime our military personnel have put their lives in harms way to defend our freedom and interests.

If the American soldiers of today (who incidentally are all volunteers and knew what they were getting into) are not allowed to finish their job with respect and dignity, the results will be the same as those of the Vietnam War. The maiming and deaths of soldiers will have been without purpose.

Where is the grit, the spirit, the pride and strength of the American People? We must not make the same mistakes. Think of the potential damage to our country and its fighting soldiers and veterans if we cut and run from Iraq before the job is done!

In response to the newspaper statement, Obama senior advisor Robert Gibbs released a statement that “During his trip as part of the CODEL to Afghanistan and Iraq, Sen. Obama visited the combat hospital in the Green Zone in Baghdad and a number of other visits with the troops. For the second part of his trip, the senator wanted to visit the men and women at Landstuhl Regional Medical Center to express his gratitude for their service and sacrifice. The senator decided out of respect for these servicemen and women that it would be inappropriate to make a stop to visit troops at a US military facility as part of a trip funded by the campaign”. The McCain camp hit back, saying that it's never “inappropriate” for a head of state to visit troops. If Obama says it's inappropriate to visit troops on a funded trip, then, when is it appropriate?