I personally wish to thank you so very much for saying what needed to be said.

Kevin, the protector, seems to think McK was barking up the wrong tree and that his comments were a dire personal attack on Dean.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

Both of them missed the point I was making and obviously the videos, re: Mr. Obama, and the release of John McCain from his Hanoi captors were merely eye candy for their mental gymnastics.

I’ll stand by my prior comments.

" Somehow truth doesn’t have a fair and balanced opposition—unless its untruth— And that is perfectly un-legitimate."

To give legitimacy to groups that oppose the military or the personal military experiences of such individuals is not in fact being fair.

It is in fact, insulting.

He ran a similar smear campaign against John Kerry in ’04, but he’s not associated with the Swiftboat people.

He hates McCain and Kerry because they exposed the scam he was pulling on the MIA families.

That group has less-than-zero credibility, and in fact should never be linked from any legitimate blog.

IVAW is more legit, but when they were first formed, the milbloggers caught them using the stories of men who had never actually been to Iraq, or even served in the military. In short, they are legit, but only because of the outside monitoring they’ve received.

This would completely curb any jitters they have!

If we had done this in the 90s, Russia never would have invaded Georgia.

Confrontation with Russia very well might lead to a nuclear war. That would lead to the end of civilization and hundred of millions — if not billions — of deaths. How can anybody support a policy which might encourage that?

We very nearly walked into the Abyss during the last century. Following that trail again would be suicidal, and the most enormous and costly mistake humanity has ever made.

And, sadly, I don’t think that’s hyperbole.

Russia (and France) have been promoting a "contain the U.S." policy almost since the "fall" of the USSR where the U.S. policy of agression has been to try to extend democracy and prevent genocide.  Not so long ago Russia (and France) were shoring up a regime that refused to comply with internationally agreed terms of surrender, went so far as to make sweatheart deals that they tried to enforce after the regime fell.  Russia & France cost American lives. 

So what’s the alternative to confrontation if Russia is not bound by the most basic tenets of international law, territorial integrity?

Why?

Because I’m afraid he is too damn hawkish for us right now. With Russia acting very insecure, threatening a new Cold War, the last thing we need in the White House is a President who thinks with that sort of mentality. I don’t want a new Cold War, and I am very sure that McCain will deliver exactly that with a tit-for-tat response with Russia that will raise tensions all over the globe. This will further diminish our attentions to Islamic extremism and nuclear proliferation… something we NEED Russia’s help on.

I don’t give a damn about Georgia. And I don’t understand why we’re putting up missile defense in Poland or talking about radar stations in Czechoslovakia, or asking the Ukraine to join NATO.

Gods…. I hate to say it… I REALLY do… But that does seem damned imperialistic and antagonistic to me.

How would we react if Russia was establishing military alliances and bases in the countries surrounding our borders? We’d cry bloody murder, and rightfully so. No wonder they feel encircled. We should have embraced Russia in the 90′s, and instead we pushed them away. It’s not too late, but acting like we are isn’t going to help.

McCain has already "talked tough" on this issue, saying things like "I will push for the Ukraine to enter NATO, and I don’t care if Putin doesn’t like it." Now Palin is talking about "confronting" Russia militarily "if necessary?"

The hell?

"Confronting" Russia militarily would lead to nuclear war! They may not have much of an army or navy any more, but that will be modernizing — and their ICBM’s can still fly as far.

If these bases and things were in our national interest, I would go with it. But they aren’t. At all. And I don’t see how McCain doesn’t see that unless… well… unless he’s a relic of the past.

Shoot. I think I fell off his bandwagon.

You’re barking up the wrong tree on this one.

You may as well be promoting Cindy Sheehan, John Kerry or Ron Paul.

Did you actually watch the John McCain video release from his Hanoi captors ?

Did you watch the facial expressions of all the other released prisoners ?

Watch again.

Then tell us that your group one or group two means anything of substance.