June 30, 2008

Character matters in a president & in a commander-in-chief

ARRA News Service - There was an outstanding column about Senator John McCain’s character by Abraham Katsman in the Jerusalem Post. I encourage you to read this column and to share it with friends and family members. Below are excerpts from the Katsman's article:

"How aware is the public that McCain has raised seven children? Or that he adopted his two oldest sons as small boys (children from his wife's prior marriage)? Or that he has raised a Bangladeshi girl with severe health problems adopted from Mother Theresa's orphanage? Or that his own sons have served in the military, including in Iraq? . . . McCain never brought up his own son's service in some of the roughest areas of Iraq. His principled refusal of political advantage from his son's Iraq service extends to refusal even to be interviewed on the subject, or to introduce his son to campaign audiences. . . .

The contrast with other politicians couldn't be more stark. How many candidates have we heard try to score political points as they crow in the public limelight about their own brief military stints, or their wife's cancer, son's car accident, or sister's death from smoking? The contrast is consistent with McCain's internalizing the codes of honor and military conduct since his youth: the veneration of courage and resilience; the expectation of fidelity to principles of honor; the homage paid to Americans who sacrificed for their country; the nobility of service and sacrifice; the expectation that one would prove worthy of the country's trust; and the humility that comes from recognizing that there are causes and people greater than oneself. It is, in short, a contrast in character.

Character matters. In a president-and particularly in a commander-in-chief, that kind of character arguably counts more than any particular political orientation or policy. From character flows leadership, as it is character which dictates morally grounded direction and engenders public trust. Character is critical to determining how a leader will respond to crisis. Will he reach deep within himself and in the traditions that shaped him and find the courage and grace to inspire strength and greatness? Will soldiers trust the wisdom and integrity of his decision when he orders them to war? Will he truly understand the terrible toll of war, as well as the price of appeasement? Will he make decisions based on considerations greater than cheap political expediency? Now, ask yourself: which candidate has repeatedly demonstrated that kind of character?" . . . [Read More]

John McCain Meets The Graham Family

ARRA News Service - Gary Bauer, Campaign for Working Families: Senator McCain flew to North Carolina this weekend for a meeting with Reverend Franklin Graham. As it turned out, Reverend Billy Graham also attended, and the three men met for nearly an hour. After the meeting, Franklin Graham’s office released the following statement:
“My father and I were pleased to have an opportunity to meet and visit with Sen. John McCain today. Sen. McCain’s office had requested a meeting in recent months and we appreciate the effort he made to travel to my father’s home. The senator and I both have sons currently serving in the military, and also have a common interest in aviation. I was impressed by his personal faith and his moral clarity on important social issues facing America today.

“My father told the senator of the time he met his father on a trip to Vietnam during the war when Admiral McCain was the commander in chief of the Pacific theater and John was being held as a prisoner of war. Admiral McCain invited my father to come see him in Honolulu and they got on their knees and prayed for John during his captivity; and did so again on a return trip. He expressed his gratitude for the senator’s long and brave service to our nation.

“We had an opportunity to pray for the senator and his family, and for God’s will to be done in this upcoming election.”
Franklin Graham also stressed “the responsibility of men and women of faith everywhere to vote and to be involved in the political process.” I was especially encouraged by Reverend Graham’s call to action because it refuted the defeatism I am hearing from so many good people. To do nothing would have devastating consequences for our values.

My friends, we have worked so hard for so long that we cannot give up now! Men and women of faith were instrumental in electing Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush. The justices they have appointed to the Supreme Court have upheld the federal ban on partial-birth abortion and affirmed your Second Amendment rights. We may be one Supreme Court appointment away from overturning Roe v. Wade.

Moreover, at least three states will vote on marriage protection amendments this November – California, Florida and Arizona. Turnout by men and women of faith will be critical to the success of each effort, and the media, legal and political establishments will be paying very close attention to the results. . . . In addition, we have an opportunity to elect more pro-family, pro-life conservatives to Congress this November. I know the media like to spin the 2008 election as a done deal. But as the saying goes, “24 hours is an eternity in politics.” It’s worth remembering that in the summer of 1988, Michael Dukakis enjoyed a nearly 20-point lead over Vice President George Bush, who ultimately won the election by seven points. This election is far from over, and we’re not giving up!

McCain - The Importance of Winning in Iraq & Supporting Israel

H/T Battleground State 08:

What's the Story with High Gas Prices?

IER hit the streets to ask why people thought gas prices were so high, who was to blame, and what could be done to lower them. Additional commentary by Mary Hutzler, a former Energy Department official and Senior Fellow at IER.

June 28, 2008

Judicial Philosophy of Candidates Affect The Supreme Court

ARRA News Service - Kerby Anderson, Point of View: The next president will no doubt nominate two or three Supreme Court justices and hundreds and hundreds of appointments to the federal bench. So understanding a candidate’s judicial philosophy will be important. The two presumptive nominees represent two very different judicial philosophies and have two different voting records in Congress concerning judicial appointments.

Senator McCain wants to appoint judges that have a strict constructionist view of the Constitution. His website says: “When applying the law, the role of judges is not to impose their own view as to the best policy choices for society but to faithfully and accurately determine the policy choices already made by the people and embodied in the law.” He also says: “The judicial role is necessarily limited and one that requires restraint and humility.”

Senator Obama says that he wants to appoint judges who have “empathy.” In one of his speeches he said, “we need someone who’s got the heart, the empathy” to understand social circumstances. “The empathy to understand what it’s like to be poor, or African-American, or gay, or disabled, or old. And that’s the criteria by which I’m going to be selecting my judges.”

Words are one thing, and voting records are another. Senator McCain supported Supreme Court nominees John Roberts and Samuel Alito. He voted to confirm both of these men and at the time called them “strict constructionists.”

Senator Obama voted against both men. While he acknowledged their academic and legal qualifications, he said at the time that other issues should be considered. He said: “I’ve seen an extraordinarily consistent attitude on the part of Judge Alito that does not uphold the traditional role of the Supreme Court as a bastion of equality and justice for United States citizens.”

This year the two candidates have two very different views of judicial interpretation and it is reflected in their votes. I'm Kerby Anderson, and that's my point of view.

June 27, 2008

Obama is Dr. No

Barack Obama is the Dr. No of energy security!

H/T ARRA News Service

More Voters Trust McCain to be Commanderin-Chief

ARRA News Service: A Gallup Poll shows more American believes McCain to be a better Commander in Chief. Gallup reports:
McCain's life experience has earned him a solid national reputation as someone who can serve as the nation's commander in chief, with 80% saying he can handle the responsibilities of this important role. Barack Obama lags well behind on the same measure, but does pass the 50% public confidence threshold. . . [Read More]

June 19, 2008

Obama's Change

H/T ARRA News Service:
Obama's Change: "Cause that's all you'll have when I'm done ...

June 18, 2008

Obama: Paying Fathers to be Fathers?

ARRA News Service - Bobby Eberle, GOPUSA: I realize that Democrats want government to rule our lives -- to be in every aspect of our daily routine -- at the expense of our hard-earned tax dollars. They believe that "government" is some sort of separate being that should "care" for us, but they forget that government has no money of its own. Nothing is free, and when the government does something to "help," that money is coming from our pockets.

Now, ultra liberal Barack Obama wants the government to pay fathers for being fathers. That's right, instead of expecting fathers to have common sense to do the right thing in raising families, Obama wants the government to give the father a payment. As the father of two, and the son of a single parent, I find this proposal to be outrageous. People need to take responsibility for their own actions. I have no desire whatsoever to pay even more taxes just to get some 18-year-old punk to act like a father.

In a Father's Day speech, Obama said the following:
We should reward fathers who pay that child support with job training and job opportunities and a larger Earned Income Tax Credit that can help them pay the bills. We should expand programs where registered nurses visit expectant and new mothers and help them learn how to care for themselves before the baby is born and what to do after -- programs that have helped increase father involvement, women's employment, and children's readiness for school. We should help these new families care for their children by expanding maternity and paternity leave, and we should guarantee every worker more paid sick leave so they can stay home to take care of their child without losing their income.
Letting this passage soak in and reading other parts of his speech, you see just how liberal and on the far left fringe Obama is. Leading up to the comments above, Obama said, "Because if fathers are doing their part ... then our government should meet them halfway." What in the world is he saying? I'll tell you... he's saying that if a father does what he is supposed to be doing, he should get taxpayer-funded benefits. This is ridiculous! Let's see an "Obama" example.... A father is ordered by the court to pay child support. The father complies with the law, and now part of my paycheck is supposed to be forwarded to this guy simply because he is obeying the law? What kind of sense does that make? . . . [Read More]Technorati Tags: , , , , , ,

June 17, 2008

Obama's Poor Judgment in Choosing Unethical Associates

Bill Smith, ARRA News: When I was young, my father and mother warned me that others would judge me by the friends with whom I associated. This fundamental truth applies to all of us as we are forced to evaluate with whom we associate and with whom we would like to represent us. Just a few days ago, Jim Johnson, the CEO of the Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae) from 1991 to 1998, resigned form Sen. Obama's vice presidential search committee. The Wall Street Journal reported Mr. Johnson received $1.9 million in loans at below market rates from Countrywide Financial, thanks to his friendship with Countrywide CEO Angelo Mozilo. In a press conference last Tuesday, Sen. Obama dismissed criticism of Mr. Johnson as "a game," and said he would keep him on. A day later, after The New York Times and The Washington Post raised more serious questions about Mr. Johnson and he resigned. In 2004, it was learned that Fannie Mae executives had concealed $10.6 billion in losses through questionable accounting practices. This was about 19 times the size of Enron's losses, but attracted much less media attention.

Now we see the patter pattern of using associates with unethical problems continuing with the potential appointment of Eric Holder to Obama vice presidential search committee. As reported by the Pittsburg Post Gazette, Eric Holder was deputy attorney general during the Clinton administration and was a key figure in the last-minute pardon of fugitive financier Marc Rich, whose ex-wife, Denise, was a major contributor to Clinton campaigns and to the Clinton library fund. Mr. Rich, who fled to Switzerland to avoid prosecution on 51 counts of tax fraud, was not eligible for a pardon under Justice Department guidelines. But Mr. Holder circumvented normal procedures and kept other Justice Department lawyers in the dark. A congressional committee described his conduct as "unconscionable."

Obama willingness to appointment people with low ethics to his Vice Presidential search committee should be a major issue of concern for all voters. If Obama were elected president, what other individuals with ethical problems or worse would he place in critical positions that will affect all of us? Cronyism and "pay back" appears high on Obama list. His past associations with bigoted people, convicted criminal, and others of questionable ethical problems, evidence Obama's poor judgement. Obama's poor judgment and his continued willingness to appoint friends and associates with low ethical standards reflects Obama association with the influence of the Chicago's Daley political machine rather than running his running for President of the United States. Of course, David Axelrod, Mayor Daley's chief image defender, is a top strategist for Obama's campaign and he was also the media consultant for Obama's US Senate campaign.
See also: There goes another one and Obama: ‘If They Bring a Knife to the Fight, We Bring a Gun’ and Obama Business Parter, Friend & Supporter Convicted of Corruption Technorati Tags: , , , , ,

June 14, 2008

Obama Absent From Town Hall Meeting

ARRA News Service: Last night, John McCain held the first of what he hoped would be ten joint town hall appearances with Barack Obama. Unfortunately, Senator Obama chose not to attend. The town hall meeting, at Federal Hall in New York City, was broadcast live on The Fox News Channel. This historic location is where President George Washington first took the oath of office. At the event, John McCain answered questions about important issues facing voters this year, including the economy, energy prices and the war. Prior to this town hall meeting, John McCain also appeared at a town hall meeting in Nashua, N.H

Last week, John McCain invited Senator Obama to participate in this event, hoping to start what would be a series of ten town hall meetings where both candidates would travel the country to answer questions from real voters. Senator Obama has yet to agree to meet us in these town halls, which would revolutionize our political process and start a real change in the tone of politics. John McCain believes in this effort and is putting it into action. There will be another town hall meeting next Thursday, so be sure to check JohnMcCain.com soon for more information.

Other Sites to Visit & to Support John McCain Online!
John McCain 2008
McCain Now
McCain Google Groups
McCain Victory 08
Veterans For McCain

Tags: ARRA, Barack Obama, Election 2008, John McCain, meeting, New York City, presidential candidates, Townhall To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to America's Best Choice. Thanks!

June 12, 2008

John McCain DID NOT “Rebuff” Billy Graham

ARRA News Service: Rumors and Lies can be distructive. The real scoop by Gary Bauer: Over the past 24 hours, I have received numerous emails from conservatives reacting angrily to the news that Sen. John McCain rejected an offer to meet with Reverend Billy Graham. Rush Limbaugh reported the story on his show yesterday, as well. The story is false and, to his credit, Rush later acknowledged that. But, e-mails are now swirling around cyberspace alleging that the Republican presidential nominee has spurned one of America’s most beloved Christian leaders. Here are the facts.

Several months ago, Senator McCain’s campaign contacted Franklin Graham’s office directly, letting them know that the senator would be willing to meet with the Graham family. In recent weeks, Texas Pastor Brian Jacobs contacted the McCain campaign offering to arrange a meeting between the senator and Billy Graham. The McCain campaign, knowing that there had already been contact with Franklin Graham, politely declined the offer.

Here’s just the first sentence of a statement released yesterday by a spokesman for Franklin Graham: “The offer to meet with Mr. Graham was extended by someone who is not in an official capacity to arrange such a meeting, nor is he affiliated with the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association.” The spokesman later added, “We don’t know who this Brian Jacobs is – we had to Google him to find out.” Unfortunately, for whatever reason, certain individuals, whose agenda remains unclear, and who were not speaking for Billy Graham, went to the press to make a story out of a non-issue. One of the individuals involved, by the way, has issued a press release announcing that he is making himself available for media interviews!

My friends, allow me to speak bluntly: This kind of embarrassing nonsense has got to stop. Our movement is on the verge of being totally overwhelmed by the Left, while some on the Right are engaged in petty, self-destructive bickering, doing the Left’s work by dividing and demoralizing fellow conservatives. The primaries are over. Either Barack Obama or John McCain will be president. Period. And there are very clear differences between them. (Click here to learn more.) Now is the time for us to work together to prevent the election of the most radical candidate in my lifetime. If we were serious about winning and serious about defending our values, all conservatives would be coming together to prevent a national disaster on Election Day.

I realize that many conservatives have disagreements with John McCain on some issues. So do I. But in this election, Senator McCain is not our enemy. Yet, as long as our movement remains divided and splintered, we will guarantee our defeat. Remember Ross Perot? Remember Ralph Nader? If Obama wins in November, every conservative in this country will be forced to watch for four or eight years while the values we cherish are attacked and destroyed. I don’t know how many different ways I can say this, but I will continue saying it until Election Day, because too much is at stake for men and women of faith and conservatives of all stripes to sit out this election. As Edmund Burke so rightly observed, “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”

Conservatives who cannot appreciate the differences between John McCain, who suffered tremendously while defending his country, and Barack Obama, who opposes virtually everything conservatives cherish, will, in my opinion, bear considerable responsibility for the judges Obama will appoint, for the continuation of Roe v. Wade, the likely redefinition of marriage in every state of the union and for whatever foreign policy and economic disasters result from the election of such an inexperienced and naïve leftist.

Myth of McCain’s Weakness Among Evangelicals

ARRA News Service: by Steven Waldman, president & editor-in-chief of Beliefnet.com on the WSJ Political Perceptions: Conventional wisdom holds that John McCain is struggling to win evangelical voters. Evangelical leader Mark DeMoss predicted last week that he’d run weaker than any Republican since 1976 . . . Sen. McCain has been criticized by prominent Christian leaders such as James Dobson . . . In the primaries, most Christian leaders backed Mitt Romney or Mike Huckabee. More recently, Sen. McCain’s decision to jettison two prominent conservative Christians – John Hagee and Rod Parsely – has sent his ratings plummeting . . . .

But is this conventional wisdom really true? Or to be more precise, Sen. McCain clearly has a problem with evangelical leaders — but does he really have a major problem with evangelical voters? On the contrary, Sen. McCain won the nomination in part because he did far better than expected with rank-and-file evangelicals. . . . For instance, in New Hampshire, among the 21% of the Republican electorate that was evangelical or “born again,” Sen. McCain won 29%, Mr. Romney 28% and Mr. Huckabee 27% — even though Mr. Huckabee is a former evangelical preacher and Mr. Romney had the endorsements of many key Christian leaders. . . .

In a recent Rasmussen poll, Sen. McCain was winning 58% of evangelicals, and . . . Sen. Barack Obama, was winning 32%. . . . Why would Sen. McCain be doing so much better among evangelical voters than evangelical leaders? First, the leadership’s disgust with Sen. McCain stems from the candidate’s treatment of them. His “agents of intolerance” speech was not an attack on evangelicals, but on a few of their leaders. Second, some of the issues over which Christian leaders have chastised Sen. McCain are inside-the-beltway concerns that don’t resonate with rank-and-file voters. . . . Third, though he’s reluctant to talk about his personal faith, in many ways Sen. McCain is substantively in perfect alignment with today’s evangelical voters. . . . Fourth, Sen. McCain’s support of the Iraq war, his war-hero history and his emphasis on fighting terrorism appeals to those Christians who feel that fighting Islam has risen to the top of the list of important issues for Christians. . . . Sen. McCain’s problems with rank-and-file evangelical voters have been vastly overstated. . . . [Read More]

June 7, 2008

What Does Barack Believe?

Gary BauerARRA News Service - Gary Bauer, Campaign for Working Families: The Obama phenomenon is so wide-spread that there is a good possibility that someone you know – someone at your church, at your place of employment, a neighbor, perhaps even a family member – has bought into the myth that this man is the one who will save our nation from the “old politics” of cynicism and partisanship, and has the wisdom and leadership to heal our land. I could give you dozens of examples of Obama’s flip-flops and inconsistencies, but for this report I’ll limit most of my remarks to his contorted views on the most fundamental responsibility of an American president – protecting our national security.

Yesterday, Barack Obama addressed the American-Israeli Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). His entire speech is a total contradiction of just about everything he has said about the Middle East. Moreover, it is wholly inconsistent with the views of his foreign policy advisors, who are unanimous in their view that Israel is the problem and must give up more land and make more concessions for “peace.”

  • For example, during a CNN debate last summer, Obama stated that he would meet in his first year in office, and “without preconditions,” with Iran’s Holocaust-denying dictator and other enemies of the United States.

    Yesterday, before the AIPAC audience, Obama put a major precondition on any meetings, saying he would only meet with Iranian leaders, “if and only if it can advance the interest of the United States.” Good luck with that.

  • On May 18th, just two weeks ago, Obama told a crowd of 80,000 people in Portland, Oregon, that Iran was a “tiny” country that doesn’t “pose a serious threat to us…”

    Yesterday, before the AIPAC audience, Obama declared, “The danger from Iran is grave, it is real, and my goal will be to eliminate this threat. … We will also use all elements of American power to pressure Iran. I will do everything in my power to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon.”

    Remember, friends, this is the very same man who opposed bi-partisan legislation sponsored by Senators Joseph Lieberman (I-CT) and Jon Kyl (R-AZ) to label the Iranian Revolutionary Guards as a terrorist entity. The bill passed 76-to-22. This is the same man who has promised to slash our defense budget and postpone the development of new weapons systems. As former Georgia Senator Zell Miller suggested of John Kerry, how does he propose to stop Iran’s nuclear ambitions and defend America? With spitballs?

  • In an interview with David Brooks of the New York Times, published May 16th, Obama told Brooks that American foreign policy must do a better job of understanding the “root causes” of terrorism, and he said that the violence of Hamas and Hezbollah “weakens their legitimate claims.” What “legitimate claims” do these terrorist organizations have? Does Al Qaeda have “legitimate claims” too?

    Yesterday, before the AIPAC audience, Obama said, “We must isolate Hamas,” and then declared, “There is no room at the negotiating table for terrorist organizations.” Well, presumably that would also include Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, whom Obama has promised to meet with during his first year, but who also directs Iran’s state support of global terrorism.

  • If Barack Obama isn’t clear about what he believes, how can he expect the voters to trust him with the presidency? Let me leave you with this. During his victory announcement in Minnesota this week, Obama seemed to declare his candidacy for Supreme Being, saying:
    ”I am absolutely certain that generations from now, we will be able to look back and tell our children that this was the moment when we began to provide care for the sick and good jobs for the jobless; this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal.”
    So, in addition to eliminating illness and poverty, Barack “The Messiah” Obama will exercise the “super powers” of the presidency to command the waters, calm the winds and “heal” the planet!

    Given Obama’s “understanding” of reality, I don’t understand how any conservative can in good conscience sit out this election and punish our country with an Obama presidency. We’re not children playing for marbles – we’re supposedly serious adults and America is at stake.

    Tags: ARRA, Barack Obama, beliefs, Gary Bauer, Iran, Israel, terrorism To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to America's Best Choice. Thanks!

    June 5, 2008

    Barack Obama Sought Radical Left New Party's Endorsement

    ARRA News Service: by Erick Erickson, RedState: Last week we documented Obama’s 1996 endorsement by the New Party: which raises the question: what is the New Party? It’s easy to allege that this group is closely tied to former communists, but digging in to the New Party and Obama’s involvement, a very dirty picture presents itself. In fact, it is abundantly apparent that Barack Obama not only knew what the New Party was when he sought its endorsement, but through his ties with ACORN, the radical left activist organization, Obama used his radical left connections to get elected to the Illinois State Senate. . . .

    The New Party was designed as a loose confederation of unions, socialists, communists, and black activists who shared common values, but often had different goals. According to John Nichols, its party platform included: . . . In Arkansas, Minnesota, Oregon, and other places the New Party has worked hand in hand with ACORN and local unions . . . With the New Party’s rise and its entanglements with ACORN came the rise of Barack Obama. According to Stanley Kurtz, “Acorn is the key modern successor of the radical 1960’s ‘New Left,’ with a ‘1960’s-bred agenda of anti-capitalism’ to match.” And Barack Obama was ACORN’s lawyer.

    Using his position at ACORN in 1995, Obama set up the playing field for his election the following year. The Boston Globe reports, “Obama was part of a team of attorneys who represented the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) in a lawsuit against the state of Illinois in 1995 for failing to implement a federal law designed to make it easier for the poor and others to register as voters. . . . With districts redrawn, ingratiating himself to black politicians on his side of the city, and rules loosened on voter registration, Obama could set out to run. And he did. Obama sought the New Party endorsement, which required him to sign a contract that he would keep up his relationship with the New Party.
    The end of the story is simple. Obama won the New Party’s nomination and, through fusion with his Democratic votes, he became the Democratic nominee. Using ACORN’s get out the vote efforts and relying on his gerrymandered Democrat district, Obama moved on to the State Senate. While there, he paid back the New Party and the far left. He opposed the Born Alive Infant Protection Act, he opposed legislation that would have prohibited the sale of pornography across the street from elementary schools and churches, and he supported allowing criminals to sue their victims if their victims injured the criminals in self-defense.

    Fast forward twelve years and Obama is running as fast as he can away from the New Party brand. But beyond a shadow of a doubt, Barack Obama knew what he was getting into and remains an ideal New Party candidate. The New Party was, and as it still exists is, an amalgamation of the left and far left designed to attract far left candidates and move the Democratic Party back to the left. Barack Obama is an example of the New Party’s success. . . . [Read More]

    Tags: ACORN, ARRA, Barack Hussein Obama, Barack Obama, Chicago, Eric Erickson, Illinois, New Party, progressive, Red State, socialist To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to America's Best Choice. Thanks!

    June 4, 2008

    The General Election Begins

    John McCainJohn McCain, Republican Candidate for President: Today, we can say with confidence the primary season is over, and the general election campaign has begun. Each American faces a decision this election and the choice between my candidacy and Senator Obama's could not be more clear. This is a change election. But the choice is between the right change and the wrong change; between going forward and going backward.

    The right change recognizes that many of the policies and institutions of our government have failed. The right kind of change will initiate widespread and innovative reforms in almost every area of government policy from energy to taxes to government spending and the military. The right change will stop impeding Americans from doing what they have always done, overcome obstacles and turn challenges into opportunities. Today, I humbly ask you to join my campaign for the right change, as we move forward together as a nation.

    The wrong change looks not to the future, but to the past for solutions that have failed us before and will surely fail us again. Like others before him, my opponent seems to think government is the answer to every problem. That's not change we can believe in. My friends, we're not a country that would rather go back than forward. We're the world's leader, and leaders don't hide from history. They make history. If we're going to lead, we must reform a government that has lost its ability to help us do so.

    I don't seek the presidency on the presumption I'm blessed with such personal greatness that history has anointed me to save my country in its hour of need. I seek the office with the humility of a man who cannot forget my country saved me. I assure you that if I'm elected president, the era of reform and problem solving will begin. From my first day in office, I'll work tirelessly to make America safe, prosperous and proud. And that, my friends, is the kind of change we need.
    Sincerely, John McCain

    Join the Fight Against Obama

    ARRA News Service: John McCain for PresidentLast night, many of us watched as Senator Barack Obama hobbled across the finish line in the Democrat primary. Throughout this prolonged Democratic primary season, one thing has been apparent: Senator Obama is fundamentally unprepared to lead this country. Whether it’s his proposals to meet with hostile leaders during the first year of his Administration, his anti-gun statements, or his plans to raise taxes for families and small businesses, America can not stand for this type of radical liberalism in the White House.

    While many members of his own Party aren't convinced that their presumptive nominee has the experience or judgment to serve as Commander in Chief, we as Republicans offer a clear choice: Senator John McCain. Senator McCain has the experience to serve and is the right leader at the right time.
    You can make a difference in several ways:
    1) Get involved with your State's GOP Party.
    2) Join the online e-McCain efforts at the following sites:
  • John McCain for President
  • McCain Now
  • John McCain 2008
  • McCain State Google Groups
  • McCainVictory08
  • Veterans For McCain
  • FaceBook - Veterans for McCain

  • 3) Contribute to the John McCain

    Election Day is five months from today. On November 4th, John McCain will be elected with your support.