John McCain..

[COLOR="RoyalBlue"]

I graduated fifth from the bottom of my class

Lululuul. So we have a C student as President (Bush), and a D student running for President.

Nicenice.

Vid in spoiler.

 Spoiler

[YOUTUBE]srbX26vp57c[/YOUTUBE]

[/COLOR]

Intelligence is not a requisite for Presidency, nor is it necessarily indicated by grades in school. All Presidents rely on their cabinet regardless. The only notable difference between candidates is their stances on issues and their solidarity. Anything other than that, such as lack of intelligence or diligence in school, is technically irrelevant, no matter how much of a red herring issue it is made of. It is truly not an issue, because any lack of ability the President might have would be more than compensated by the rest of the administration. Notice that it is in truth, not the President, but the administration that really runs things.

And if I didn't make it clear above, or in other posts I've made, I would like to stress it again: grades are not an accurate representation of intelligence or knowledge.

ps have you passed Naval Academy? Are you familiar with their level education? How about Yale? This video cites Bush as a C student at Yale; you think you could cut that? Are you familiar enough with it to even make an educated answer to any of these questions?

Presidencys SHOULD be based more on Diplomacy than anything else...
Since you know EVERYONE ALL OVER THE WORLD assumes that the US president represents all Americans.
...
Also Prez= Highest Foreign Diplomat
...
And really a good diplomer(?) should be able to effectively sway the Legislative, Judicial, and American Public.
From a wheelchair, cause of polio...
FDR FTW!!!

[SIZE="3"]A President should know how the modern technology era is run. I'm not asking him to know about networking, or command prompting, or even how to delete his own cookies from his own internet browser. But anyone who's had to type any assignment or be involved in any amount of paperwork should be familiar by now with how the basic mechanisms of a computer are run. If they don't even know that much, then it is highly questionable what type of era they should be running.

Why is it important to have a President who knows about computers?

With many issues such as government censoring of many websites, government observation of many forum sites that they find to be possible of conspiracy, and further laws that touch upon the themes of freedom and restriction of today's modern computer technology, we need a leader who has at least some competence to know what is going on and a leader who will have a firm position to either agree or disagree with Congress.

Why is it important that he is a C or a D student?

Are you fucking me? The United States Naval Academy is a notable school and has strong academics. Feel free to look it up. However, this does not excuse him from scoring so low out of his class. Looking at the positives, he told the truth. But honestly, how could you let yourself pineapple up so bad? [/SIZE]

Yeah, I saw this.

Regardless, Obama is by far the better candidate.

Regardless, Obama is by far the better candidate.

Because he claims to support "change" and a new form of politics but in fact is the same as any candidate, changing his views to attract moderates? (Now, I'm not denying that McCain does this, but Obama claims to have moral high ground)

Yeah, I saw this.

Regardless, Obama is by far the better candidate.

The candidate is only as good as their stance on the issues. I'm not a fan of the sloppy pull out plan, nor am I in favor of government providing something that the individual should be held responsible for. Now don't get me wrong, I'm not in favor of wasting time and money in Iraq, but a sloppy pull out is not what they need. Sort of a "you broke it, you bought it" sort of thing.

WHAT ABOUT DENNIS Ku-Zucchini-eze.....?
There is a Moderate mid-ground candidate...
At least in a Global sense.
...
But really.
Really.
Really.
40+ old white dudes as a President.
0 Black dudes.
0 Penis-less dudes (or women)
...
It seems..
Almost destined..

ps have you passed Naval Academy? Are you familiar with their level education? How about Yale? This video cites Bush as a C student at Yale; you think you could cut that? Are you familiar enough with it to even make an educated answer to any of these questions?

You see where the "C" student from yale got us? Can you see how he has one of the lowest approvale ratings of any president? How far do you think the D student is going to get us? If they can't cut it in school (no matter how prestigious the school is) what makes you think they can cut it running an entire country?

You see where the "C" student from yale got us? Can you see how he has one of the lowest approvale ratings of any president? How far do you think the D student is going to get us? If they can't cut it in school (no matter how prestigious the school is) what makes you think they can cut it running an entire country?

That is a terrible analogy...
Bush JR. just failed to listen to public opinion and was a terrible orator.
That is why we mock him.
Not because he was a C student.
...
There are an ABUNDANT amount of people who failed academically and succeeded vastly in Intelligence requiring jobs.
..
Remember a college drop out is one of the richest men on earth.
(bill gates)

That is a terrible analogy...
Bush JR. just failed to listen to public opinion and was a terrible orator.
That is why we mock him.
Not because he was a C student.
...
There are an ABUNDANT amount of people who failed academically and succeeded vastly in Intelligence requiring jobs.
..
Remember a college drop out is one of the richest men on earth.
(bill gates)

I wasn't trying to say that because he's a C student, that he has a very low approval rating, and being a bad speaker won't give you one of the lowest presidential approval ratings of all time either. True, he did fail to listen to public opinion, which has a huge impact on what people think of him. It's also true that people who fail academically can still succeed in their actual job, but our president just isn't one of those people.

Well i'm all for going after the people who killed thousands of people on our own soil, but vengeance can only be so sweet for so long before it ends up biting us in the ass.

that he has a very low approval rating, and being a bad speaker won't give you one of the lowest presidential approval ratings of all time either.

Just pointing out that the President has a low approval rating isn't taking into account that people are generally fed up with all government. The democrat-led congress has lower approval ratings than the president.

It basically shows that we (as a whole) vote for people that have a D or R (or just voting against a D/R) beside their name, even if we don't agree with what they do/say.

Unfortunately, with the media overload that occurs, and the fact that bad news sells people either tone out good news or are just inundated with the bad. So even though there is more information, people either don't know what to believe or just get frustrated with the whole process. We really need a good 3rd party this election to get the main 2 parties back on track and talking about what they really believe, not just pandering to get votes.

You see where the "C" student from yale got us? Can you see how he has one of the lowest approvale ratings of any president? How far do you think the D student is going to get us? If they can't cut it in school (no matter how prestigious the school is) what makes you think they can cut it running an entire country?

Bush's failures as President are due to his stances on unpopular things. It is not because of anything else; it is because the people don't agree with the actions he has taken. And the actions he has taken are not something which is inherently stupid. It's just a stance on something and has no bearing on a person's intelligence, knowledge, or ability to perform this job.

If McCain as president would remain firm in an unpopular stance, he might make just as an unpopular president as Bush. If Obama comes in and remains firm in an unpopular stance, he might make just as an unpopular president as Bush.

Seriously, guys, these two people are just as qualified to be the president as each other. The differences between the candidates are on their platforms, not in their qualifications.

You also have to remember that when he graduated it was probably along time ago, and has probably gotten smarter over the years. At least he is being open about it. All though i'm no where close to being a republican, he does seem better then huckabee(sp?) and way better then bush..

((plus i saw him on Saturday Night Live x3 Hes actually funny ;D ))

All I can say is this:

http://therealmccain.com/


Take your pick.

All I can say is this:

http://therealmccain.com/

Take your pick.

As a proponent of free market economics, I must say that you and whoever made that site, either have no respect for the free market, or are just plain stupid.

It is not the government's job to control businesses. If you think it is, then you're not in the target audience to begin with; if you think the government SHOULD control things, then you have no place even listening to a thing a Republican has to say about economically right sided platforms. Upon seeing he's a Republican talking about economic issues, you should just think to yourself "hmm... I disagree with what he says, but he's in line with his party to say the things he does, so whatever... I'll just go over here and not try to criticize such basic principles as that because I obviously already disagree with them and no discussion on the matter will convince either parties otherwise".

Unless your statement is tied to the lobbyist thing. I'll go ahead and agree that lobbyists suck, but that's the system in place, and it is impossible to get things done without them being involved. If it were up to me, I'd do away with the whole thing, but that's not going to happen, no matter which party gets what seat in government.

As a proponent of free market economics, I must say that you and whoever made that site, either have no respect for the free market, or are just plain stupid.

It is not the government's job to control businesses. If you think it is, then you're not in the target audience to begin with; if you think the government SHOULD control things, then you have no place even listening to a thing a Republican has to say about economically right sided platforms. Upon seeing he's a Republican talking about economic issues, you should just think to yourself "hmm... I disagree with what he says, but he's in line with his party to say the things he does, so whatever... I'll just go over here and not try to criticize such basic principles as that because I obviously already disagree with them and no discussion on the matter will convince either parties otherwise".

Unless your statement is tied to the lobbyist thing. I'll go ahead and agree that lobbyists suck, but that's the system in place, and it is impossible to get things done without them being involved. If it were up to me, I'd do away with the whole thing, but that's not going to happen, no matter which party gets what seat in government.

Lol, I never made that site..

Lol, I never made that site..

I never said you did.

Perhaps I should have made it more clear. I didn't mean that I believed you were saying things directly, but by linking to that site, you were implying that you agreed with it's view, and thus, were saying things by proxy.

My name is John McCain, and I enjoy the extreme use of the military.

All I can say is this:

http://therealmccain.com/


Take your pick.

If you can name one party that can get rid of the lobbyists by obtaining at least a reasonable amount of representation (maybe 20% or so at least), then tell me, and I will vote for them. As it is, all third parties won't get anywhere so long as the United States sticks with its first-past-the-post system.

---

My name is John McCain, and I enjoy the extreme use of the military.

My name is Barack Obama, and I enjoy pandering to my base when I say that all the troops will be out of Iraq in 16 months, then changing my view "to suit that on the battlefield" (really not that of the independent swing voters? Hm...)