I saw a poll a few days ago. Both Democrats and Republicans were asked, "What are the most important issues to you going into the 2006 elections."

There were major contrasts.

For Democrats the #1 issue was Iraq and the #2 issue was the economy. For Republicans the #1 issue was terrorism and the #2 issue was family values.

What a contrast!

Do Democrats actually worry about Iraq all day? This has shown exactly how the media and their leadership has failed them. The talking points for Democrats daily is to complain about Iraq, but offer no solution. This barrage from the leadership and the media has caused Iraq to become the #1 issue in Democrats lives. That is extremely sad! I couldn't image thinking about the war in Iraq for hours a day. For Iraq to be your #1 issue, Iraq is about terrorism, family and other important issues.

As for #2, the economy is booming! We have extremely low unemployment and we are growing. The DOW JONES is 3,000 points higher that it was on Sep 11, 2001. People that want to work are working. The home ownership rate in America is at the highest rate ever. What are Democrats so worried about?

For me I am more concerned with terrorists killing civilians. It is not something I think about every day, but it is a priority in my live. When I travel on an airplane I think about terrorism before I give Iraq a thought.

Just my thoughts.

__________________
Visit USFK Classifieds, the FREE classifieds in Korea!

Family values all the way! I'm supporting Obama, a democrat, but I think family is the most important thing in the country and in the world.

What a shame that the economy is #2 and Values shoud be that an elected official should be held to higher ones. If you look there is a pole out there I head on a news report where politicians thought the War & Terrorism were top issues and when normal people were asked neither made the top five.

__________________
Just my humble opinion!

Why are you so staunchly behind Obama? What research have you done to determine that he is the guy for you?

i have heard him speak many times, and i feel that he has the most character than any other candidate. but it doesn't really matter, since i'll only be 17 in november of 2008, and my parents are voting for mccain.

I agree Obama has character but what must also be looked at are what values he will bring to the office. Once the primarys get nearer we will see what he really supports and does not. I feel that as in previous years McCain will not have National support to carry the nomination and many including those in Arizona are tired of the "I was a POW!" and his current stance on supporting the war does not hold water with many. Obama, to his credit has not changed his view of the war. He has always been against it unlike others who are running who supported the war when it was the popular thing to do and now say they never would have done it if it was them. Tells me either they were lieing then or now. The decision was made and based on what we now know was false intel. So to say they would not support it if they had been in office is an untruth as they did when they supported it in congress then.

__________________
Just my humble opinion!

Why does everyone state, "it was false intel?" That is crap. That is what the media presents, but it is crap. I spent 6 tours in Operation Northern Watch and was an Iraqi analyst for 5 years. For the media and other who DO NOT have access to classified information to make statements like this is baseless. Just because you don't find large amounts of WMD doesn't mean they were not there. This is like giving a drug lord 6 months of warning before you find his house, then when searching his house you find nothing and say, "see there were no drugs."

Honestly, it is annoying hearing people talk like it is a fact that the intel was bad. Just because Democrats repeat it over and over doesn't make it a fact.

So, what if Obama has not changed his stance on the war. It is much easier to stay the course when his course is what everyone likes today. It is much more respectable for someone to stay the course when it is not the popular choice.

__________________
Visit USFK Classifieds, the FREE classifieds in Korea!

“We should not have gone to war knowing the information that we know today," Kerry said Wednesday on ABC’s “Good Morning America.” "Knowing there was no imminent threat to America, knowing there were no weapons of mass destruction, knowing there was no connection of Saddam Hussein to al Qaeda, I would not have gone to war. That's plain and simple."

But on Aug. 9, 2004, when asked if he would still have gone to war knowing Saddam Hussein did not possess weapons of mass destruction, Kerry said: “Yes, I would have voted for the authority. I believe it was the right authority for a president to have.” Speaking to reporters at the edge of the Grand Canyon, he added: “[Although] I would have done this very differently from the way President Bush has."

The Kerry campaign says voting to authorize the war in Iraq is different from deciding diplomacy has failed and waging war. But Kerry’s nuanced position has contradicted itself on whether it was right or wrong to wage the war.

In May 2003, at the first Democratic primary debate, John Kerry said his vote authorizing the president to use force was the “right decision” though he would have “preferred if we had given diplomacy a greater opportunity.”

But then in January 2004, Kerry began to run as anti-war candidate, saying, "I don't believe the president took us to war as he should have."

__________________
Visit USFK Classifieds, the FREE classifieds in Korea!

Here are some quotes by Kerry:

On Hardball on Feb. 5, 2002. The host, Chris Matthews, asks Kerry whether Iraq "can be reduced to a diplomatic problem—can we get this guy to accept inspections of those weapons of mass destruction potentially and get past a possible war with him?" Kerry answers: "Outside chance, Chris. Could it be done? The answer is yes. He would view himself only as buying time and playing a game, in my judgment. Do we have to go through that process? The answer is yes."

Kerry's speech to the Democratic Leadership Council on July 29, 2002. "I agree completely with this administration's goal of a regime change in Iraq," Kerry says. He calls Saddam a "renegade" who has betrayed the terms of his 1991 cease-fire.

"I said at the time I would have preferred if we had given diplomacy a greater opportunity. But I think it was the right decision to disarm Saddam Hussein. And when the president made the decision, I supported him, and I support the fact that we did disarm [Saddam]."

Then he was the Anti-war candidate and there we no reasons to go to war and never any WMD.

__________________
Visit USFK Classifieds, the FREE classifieds in Korea!

Mike, it is not just the WMD or other things. The Intel community its self said that the Intel presented to the president was not accurate. Did the Democrats spin it out of proportion? Hell yes they did.
The only thing congress was/is good at is wasting our money doing a lot of needless fact finding. Having committees to investigate things that never have a resolution. If they put 50% of the energy into finding solutions as they do at finger pointing perhaps we would have things like Social Security fixed. I used the term bad Intel, it is a fact and that is not from the Democrats but rather what was Stated by a combination of CIA/FBI & British Intelligence. If that is not true then the Republicans did a very crappy job of stating other wise and in an election year I would think that would be important.
I think the problem has been once Saddam was taken out of the equation it was no longer treated as a Military Mission but was driven by our Politics and greed of certain parts of our economic structure.
My point was that for example Hillary supported the war to go in and Statements she made recently as if she was in charge we would not be at war are untrue. If she had the same info the Bush was given the decision would have been the same. She changed her position when it became the popular thing to do. Obama did not support from the start and to his credit McCain has not wavered either. McCain's position on the war may cost him the nomination along with some other missteps he has taken. I for one hope he is on the ticket in one way or another as that will help keep my vote Republican .............

__________________
Just my humble opinion!