McCain Releases His Taxes

This is just one more reason I'll never run for president. My taxes are in poor shape. But Senator McCain is doing a little better than I am. His press office just sent me this.

Senator McCain's tax returns show that he paid $157,231 in federal taxes for 2006 and 2007.  In the past two years, Senator and Mrs. McCain have contributed $340,323 to charitable causes. Below please find summary information about Senator McCain's 2006 and 2007 tax returns.
To view the relevant documents, please see: http://www.johnmccain.com/mccainfinancial
BACKGROUND ON THE 2006 AND 2007 TAX RETURNS
Senator and Mrs. McCain have kept their personal finances separate throughout their 27-year marriage. Accordingly, they have for many years filed separate tax returns. However, their home state of Arizona is a community property jurisdiction.  In community property states, individuals maintain a separation of all property brought to the marriage, or inherited during it, but share financial responsibility for other assets acquired through the efforts of each spouse during the marriage. This means that their tax returns report one half of each of their community property income and expenses (such as income each of them earn as salaries, Senator McCain's book royalties, and expenses attributable to both of them such as charitable contributions from community assets).
Accordingly, Senator McCain's 2006 and 2007 tax returns contain a detailed "Statement A" showing the allocation of his and Mrs. McCain's community property income and expenses to their respective tax returns (2006 - 2007). John McCain's 2006 and 2007 tax returns, including the community property income and expense allocation, are available for download below. (2006 - 2007)
Publication 555 from the Internal Revenue Service is also available for download below. This publication explains the community property filing rules for various states (including Arizona) and their effects on married taxpayers filing separate returns. View
SUMMARY OF TAX RETURNS
Taxes Paid:
For 2006, Senator McCain paid $72,771 in federal income, alternative minimum, and self-employment taxes (LINES 57 and 58) on taxable income of $215,304 (LINE 43), which is a 33.8% tax rate. View
For 2007, Senator McCain paid $84,460 in federal income, alternative minimum, and self-employment taxes (LINES 57 and 58) on taxable income of $258,800 (LINE 43), which is a 32.6% tax rate. View
Charitable Contributions:
Senator McCain donates his royalties from his books to charitable organizations. This sum has totaled over $1,800,000 since 1998 when he signed his first book deal. Senator McCain's book income of $256,898 for 2006 and 2007 is comprised of earnings for Faith of My Fathers, Worth the Fighting For, Why Courage Matters, Character is Destiny, and Hard Call.
Beginning in 1991, Senator McCain has also donated the increase in his Senate salary for that year and each subsequent year to charity because he opposed the Congressional pay increase at that time and pledged not to accept the pay raises. The cumulative total of these donations is over $450,000.
2006
In 2006, Senator and Mrs. McCain donated $129,390 from community assets to charity, of which Senator  McCain's one-half allocation was $64,695. This is 19% of his adjusted gross income.
2007
In 2007, Senator and Mrs. McCain donated $210,933 from community assets to charity, of which Senator McCain's one-half allocation is $105,467. This is 27.2% of his adjusted gross income for the year.
Most of Senator McCain's contributions were made to the John and Cindy McCain Family Foundation, which makes direct contributions to charities. The Foundation's tax returns for 2006 and 2007, which include a list of the charities to which Senator and Mrs. McCain contributed through the McCain Family Foundation in 2006 and 2007, are available for download below. (2006 - 2007)
SUMMARY OF SENATOR MCCAIN'S ACTUAL (NOT COMMUNAL) INCOME
[FROM STATEMENT A OF TAX RETURN]

2006
2007
Senate Salary:
$161,675
$161,708
Book Royalty Income:
$80,390
$176,508
Social Security Income:
$22,104
$23,157
US Navy Pension*:
$56,496
$58,358

* [Non-Taxable and therefore not reported as income on Statement A]

Note About Mrs. McCain's Financial Information:
Since the beginning of their marriage, Senator McCain and Mrs. McCain have always maintained separate finances.  As required by federal law and Senate rules, Mrs. McCain has released significant and extensive financial information through Senate and Presidential disclosure forms.  In the interest of protecting the privacy of her children, Mrs. McCain will not be releasing her personal tax returns.

Note About Hensley & Company:
In her role as Chairman of Hensley & Company, a privately-held business founded by her parents, Mrs. McCain's main areas of responsibility focus on strategic planning and corporate vision.  Having served the greater Phoenix area since 1955, Hensley & Company is widely respected as an exemplary corporate citizen, and makes significant charitable contributions of its own.

STATEMENT BY JOHN MCCAIN ON THE COLOMBIA FREE TRADE AGREEMENT

"I am profoundly dismayed by events in Congress that prevent an up or down vote on the Colombian Free Trade Agreement. It is critical that the United States meet its obligations and support an important ally in the battle against international narco-terrorism and a bulwark of democracy in Latin America.

"Colombia is a beacon of hope in a region where others are actively seeking to thwart economic progress and democracy. We must not turn our back on fledgling democracies in this region, and we must not turn our back on American workers when all they want is the right to sell them in other countries.

"This agreement was negotiated in good faith by Colombia and the United States. Members of Congress from both parties were consulted extensively throughout the negotiation process. Delaying approval of the Colombian Free Trade Agreement will not create one American job or start one American business. But rejecting this agreement will undercut America's standing with our allies not only in a critical region but also across the world."

McCain's plan

JOHN MCCAIN OUTLINES NEW INITIATIVES TO PROVIDE IMMEDIATE HELP FOR AMERICAN FAMILIES



Today, John McCain Outlined Several New Initiatives To Provide Immediate Help For American Families. Across the country, families are facing economic challenges. Gas prices are rising, mortgages are threatened, and thousands have lost their jobs. Now is the time to act and John McCain outlined several near-term, tangible plans to address some of the challenges confronting Americans today.

Bolstering Job Security:

John McCain Will Reform The Unemployment Insurance (UI) System To Better Assist Displaced Workers. Job security may well be the most pressing problem confronting Americans. Jobs are in jeopardy and the government backstop is not up to the task. For more than year, John McCain has been calling for comprehensive reform of our unemployment insurance and displaced worker programs.

John McCain Believes We Should Have A Single, Seamless Approach To Job Transition Assistance. The UI system must be more effective in helping those who have lost a job. John McCain will modernize and transform our current programs by consolidating redundant federal programs, strengthening community colleges and technical training and giving displaced workers more choices to find their way back to productive and prosperous lives.

· Our Unemployment System Should Support Lifelong-Education And Build The Financial Resources To Guard Against Any Job Loss.

· The Unemployment System Should Encourage Work And Minimize The Time Spent On Government Programs. Workers that get back to work faster and have a strong track record of employment should be rewarded more.

John McCain Will Reform The UI System So That A Portion Of Each Worker's Unemployment Insurance Tax Is Deposited Into A Lost Earnings Buffer Account (LEB). If an individual becomes unemployed, the LEB may be used to cover needed expenses, with a backstop of traditional UI if the account is exhausted before 26 weeks. Workers will have an incentive to preserve their LEB by getting back to work quickly, and may be eligible for a re-employment bonus if they get a new job quickly. The LEB will be portable, and upon retirement, the property of the worker.

John McCain Will Reform Training Programs To Provide Quick Assistance To Workers Seeking New Skills. Workers will have access to a flexible training account that permits them to pay for training at a community college and use leftover funds to keep their health insurance.

John McCain Will Provide Special, Targeted Assistance For Older Workers. Because training is often inefficient for older workers, those 55 years of age and older who have built up an LEB will be eligible for a Lost Earnings Supplement. The supplement of up to 50 percent of their earnings loss (up to a maximum of $10,000) for two years will be rewarded for those who find work inside 26 weeks.

Helping Americans Confront Higher Living Costs:

John McCain Will Help Americans Hurting From High Gasoline And Food Costs. Americans need help right now and relief from high gasoline prices. John McCain will act immediately to reduce the pain of high gas prices.

· John McCain Will Stop Filling The Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) To Reduce Demand. International demand for oil is bolstered by federal purchases for the SPR. There is no reason to fill it when oil is so expensive, the overall SPR is of adequate size, and when it places further upward pressure on prices.

· John McCain Will End Policies That Contribute To Higher Transportation And Food Costs. Ethanol subsidies, tariff barriers and sugar quotas drive up food prices and hurt Americans. However, we cannot take the wrong direction and cut off trade for American goods.

· As President, John McCain Will Pursue A National Strategy To Address Higher Energy Costs.

Helping Americans With The Housing Crisis:

John McCain Believes There Is Nothing More Important Than Keeping Alive The American Dream Of Owning A Home. Priority number one is to keep well-meaning, deserving home owners who are facing foreclosure in their homes.

John McCain's Approach To Helping Sub-Prime Or Other Financially Strapped Mortgage Borrowers Is Built On Sound Principles:

· No Taxpayer Money Should Bail Out Real Estate Speculators Or Financial Market Participants Who Failed To Perform Due Diligence In Assessing Credit Risks. Any assistance for borrowers should be focused solely on homeowners and any government assistance to the banking system should be based solely on preventing systemic risk.

· Any Policy Of Financial Assistance Should Be Accompanied By Reforms That Promote Greater Transparency And Accountability To Ensure We Never Face This Problem Again.

John McCain Is Proposing A New "HOME Plan" To Provide Robust, Timely And Targeted Help To Those Hurt By The Housing Crisis. Under his HOME Plan, every deserving American family or homeowner will be afforded the opportunity to trade a burdensome mortgage for a manageable loan that reflects their home's market value.

· Eligibility: Holders of a sub-prime mortgage taken after 2005 who live in their home (primary residence only); can prove creditworthiness at the time of the original loan; are either delinquent, in arrears on payments, facing a reset or otherwise demonstrate that they will be unable to continue to meet their mortgage obligations; and can meet the terms of a new 30 year fixed-rate mortgage on the existing home.

· How It Works: Individuals pick up a form at any Post Office and applies for a HOME loan. The FHA HOME Office certifies that the individual is qualified, and contacts the individual's mortgage servicer. The mortgage servicer writes down and retires the existing loan, which is replaced by an FHA guaranteed HOME loan from a lender.

John McCain Calls For The Immediate Formation Of A Justice Department Mortgage Abuse Task Force. The Task Force will aggressively investigate potential criminal wrongdoing in the mortgage industry and bring to justice any who violated the law. The DOJ Task Force will offer assistance to State Attorney Generals who are investigating abusive lending practices.

John McCain Will Bolster Groups Like Neighborworks America That Provide Mortgage Assistance To Homeowners In Their Communities.

McCain comments on China, Olympics

"Our relationship with China is important, and we value our ability to cooperate with the Chinese government on a wide variety of strategic, economic, and diplomatic fronts. But the Chinese government needs to understand that in our modern world, how a nation treats its citizens is a legitimate subject of international concern. China has signed numerous international agreements that make China's treatment of its citizens a subject of legitimate international concern, not just a matter of national sovereignty. To be a responsible stakeholder in the modern world, a government must also be responsible at home, in protecting, not trampling, the rights of its people.

"I deplore the violent crackdown by Chinese authorities and the continuing oppression in Tibet of those merely wishing to practice their faith and preserve their culture and heritage. I have listened carefully to the Dalai Lama and am convinced he is a man of peace who reflects the hopes and aspirations of Tibetans. I urge the government of the People's Republic of China to address the root causes of unrest in Tibet by opening a genuine dialogue with His Holiness, the Dalai Lama, aimed at granting greater autonomy. I urge the Chinese authorities to ensure peaceful protest is not met with violence, to release monks and others detained for peacefully expressing their views and to allow full outside access to Tibet.

"I understand and respect Prime Minister Brown's decision not to attend the Olympic opening ceremonies. I believe President Bush should evaluate his participation in the ceremonies surrounding the Olympics and, based on Chinese actions, decide whether it is appropriate to attend. If Chinese policies and practices do not change, I would not attend the opening ceremonies. It does no service to the Chinese government, and certainly no service to the people of China, for the United States and other democracies to pretend that the suppression of rights in China does not concern us. It does, will and must concern us."

Democrats are a Disaster

From Ralph Nader:


Ralph Nader for President 2008

April 3, 2008
www.votenader.org

The Democrats are just another corporate party.

As such, they are a disaster for the American people.

If you had any lingering doubts about this, check out the front page of the Wall Street Journal yesterday.

Too Much Corporate Power? The article is titled: Business Donors Bypass McCain, Democrats Rake In Cash From Industry by Brody Mullins.

Mullins reports that both Obama and Clinton have been cleaning McCain's clock "among business interests that give mainly to Republicans."

Of seven major industries that have been the most reliable Republican resources, McCain has raised $13.1 million through February, compared with $22.5 million for Obama and $27.1 million for Clinton, the Journal reported.

Now, ask yourself - if the Democrats were the party of the people, if they were truly going to make the corporations serve the American people, would the corporate executives be dumping millions into their campaigns?

No they would not.

Right now, the American people are subservient to the corporations and their puppet politicians in both parties.

Nader/Gonzalez would turn that around.

Under Nader/Gonzalez, the corporations would serve the people.

That's the message Nader/Gonzalez is taking to every state in the union in this 2008 election campaign.

Today, our volunteers will be turning in 2,000 signatures in Hawaii - more than three times the required number - to get Nader/Gonzalez on the ballot in the Aloha state.

One by one, we're working the states.

Right now we're focusing on Kansas.

In Kansas, we need to raise $15,000 to get Nader/Gonzalez on the ballot there.

In response to our initial appeal yesterday, 49 of you donated $3,790 - an average of $77 a donation.

So, already, we're a quarter of the way to our goal in Kansas.

Thank you.

Now we need another 110 of you to donate $100 or more each - and once we meet our goal, we'll give the marching orders to our folks in Kansas.

New Mexico - done.

Hawaii - plan on turning in our signatures later today.

Next up Kansas.

One by one, we'll give the voters of this country a chance to vote for a candidacy that puts people before corporations.

Thank you for your ongoing support.

Onward.

The Nader Team

Another Video: It's 3 a.m. and . . .

MSNBC'S JOE SCARBOROUGH: "Barack Obama specifically continuing to talk about the fact that you want to keep us at war in Iraq for 100 years. Now, you've explained this time and time again, but they keep bringing it up. Do you think you're gonna be hearing this through November?"

JOHN MCCAIN: "I don't know, but it's been condemned by every objective media observer, these people who look at these things. And clearly, Senator Obama is being disingenuous because he knows better. Anybody who looks at the entire clip of the exchange I had with the gentleman at the town hall meeting in New Hampshire, clearly I said right after that, just as we've been in South Korea, Germany, Japan, et cetera. That's a presence after we win the war. But I don't think the American people will buy it.

"But, you know, Senator Obama in the last few days said he wanted a, quote, 'strike force' -- a 'strike force' in Iraq. I really would be interested, Joe, in hearing what exactly that means after he has continuously said he would withdrawal immediately or yesterday or whatever it is. But the point is, the American people know that I have said that I would much rather lose a campaign than lose a war and that there would be ups and downs. ... But see, [Senator Obama] just said you could have a strike force. So we really don't know. I think somebody ought to ask what in the world he's talking about, especially since he has no experience or background at all in national security affairs."

Watch John McCain On MSNBC's "Morning Joe"

John McCain On His Pro-Growth Economic Agenda:

CNN'S KIRAN CHETRY: "Much has been made, of course, of the comments that you made back in December that the economy wasn't your strong suit, but specifically how would you grow jobs in the climate we're in now?"

JOHN MCCAIN: "Well, first of all, let's clear that up. I said it wasn't my strongest because I spent 22 years in the military, and I have been a member of the Armed Services Committee and involved in every major national security challenge in the last 20 years. I've been involved as Chairman of the Commerce Committee. I have been involved as part of the Reagan Revolution where we cut taxes and restrained spending and embarked on one of the strongest periods of economic growth in the history of this country. I know economics very well, certainly better than Senator Clinton and Senator Obama. So let's clear up that.

"Obviously we've got to restrain spending. Obviously we need to give middle income Americans more tax cuts rather than less. We have to have balanced budgets. We can't keep borrowing money from China. We have to exercise fiscal discipline and make sure that every earmarked project and pork barrel project is vetoed and not allowed. And someone right now will say that's only a small part of the budget, that kind of spending has led to corruption, and it has led to members of Congress that are now residing in federal prison. We're going to have to sit down together and fix Social Security and fix Medicare and balance our budgets and exercise the kind of fiscal discipline that kept us and caused us and kept us to be on a very long period of economic prosperity. Right now Americans are hurting. So we have to make sure that people keep their homes and that we create more jobs and, by the way, I am a strong believer in free trade."

And here some talk from McCain today in Jacksonville.

For many years in my life, I lacked a fixed address for any significant length of time. Jacksonville came closer to being a hometown for me than any place in the country. My family lived here before I went to war, and this is the place I came home to after the war. We lived here again in 1974 for two years, when I was Executive Officer, and then Commanding Officer of VA 174, the Replacement Air Group at Cecil Field. So it always feels a bit like a homecoming whenever I return here.

This place was never more special to me than during my unexpectedly long deployment overseas, when the good people of this place looked after my family in my absence. I have always been indebted to Florida friends and neighbors in Orange Park for taking such good care of my family while I was away.

Our neighbors in Orange Park, many of whom, but not all, were Navy families, were extraordinarily kind and generous while I was in Vietnam. They were the mainstay of my family's support. They helped with the maintenance of our home, took my children to sporting events, offered whatever counsel and support was needed, and generally helped keep my family together, body and soul, until I could get back to them. They were nothing less than an extended family to my family, and their love and concern were as much a mark of their good character as it was a blessing to the people they helped.

My daughter, Sidney, was an infant when I first left for Vietnam. She did not know me, or I her very well, when I returned many years later to find a bright and cheerful six year old little girl waiting for me. I, too, was a different person when we were reunited than I had been when we parted. Not in every respect, but certainly in important ways.

In the upheaval of war, that great leveler of ego and distinction, things change. War is a remorseless scavenger, hacking through the jungle of deceit, pretense, and self-delusion to find truth, some of it ugly, some of it starkly beautiful; to find virtue and expose iniquity where we never expected them to reside. No other human experience exists on the same plane. It is a surpassing irony of war, for all the horrors and heroism it occasions, it provides the soldier with every conceivable human experience. Experiences that usually take a lifetime to know are all felt, and felt intensely, in one brief passage of life. Anyone who loses a loved one knows what great sorrow feels like. And any one who gives life to a child knows what great joy feels like. The combat veteran knows what great loss and great joy feel like when they occur in the same moment, the same experience. It can be transforming.

In Vietnam, where I formed the closest friendships of my life, some of those friends never came home to the country they loved so well. I detest war. It might not be the worst thing to befall human beings, but it is wretched beyond all description. Not the valor with which it is fought nor the nobility of the cause it serves, can glorify war. Whatever gains are secured, it is loss the veteran remembers most keenly. Only a fool or a fraud sentimentalizes the merciless reality of war. However heady the appeal of a call to arms, however just the cause, we should still shed a tear for all that is lost when war claims its wages from us.

However glorious the cause, it does not define the experience of war. War mocks our idealized conceptions of glory, whether they are genuine and worthy or something less. War has its own truths. And if glory can be found in war, it is a different concept altogether. It is a hard-pressed, bloody, and soiled glory, steely and forbearing. It is decency and love persisting amid awful degradation, in unsurpassed suffering, misery, and cruelty. It is the discovery that we belong to something bigger than ourselves.

In the immediacy, chaos, destruction and shock of war, soldiers are bound by duty and military discipline to endure and overcome. Their duty and loyalty belong to their country. They find solace in their faith in God. But their strongest loyalty, the bond that cannot break, is to the cause that is theirs alone each other. It is through loyalty to comrades in arms that they begin to understand that to love one's country is to love one's countrymen, and to serve the national ideal that commenced their personal transformation. When war is over, they might have the largest but not exclusive claim on the success of their nation's cause and seldom share in the blame for its failure. But their claim is shorn of all romance, all nostalgia for the suffering with which it was won. From that crucible they have but one prize, one honor: that they had withstood the savagery and losses of war and were found worthy by the men who stood with them.

This is the truth of war, of honor and courage. Before I went to war its meaning was obscure to me, hidden in the spare language of men who had gone to war before me and been changed forever by the experience. The Naval Academy, with its inanimate and living memorials to fidelity and valor, tried to teach this truth to me. But I had interpreted the lesson, as I had interpreted my father's example, within the limits of my vanity. I thought glory was the object of war, and all glory was self-glory.

No more. For I had learned the truth: there are greater pursuits than self-seeking. Glory is not a conceit. It is not a decoration for valor. It is not a prize for being the strongest, the most clever, or the boldest. Glory belongs to the act of being constant to something greater than yourself, to the cause, to your principles, to the people on whom you rely, and who rely on you in return. No misfortune, no injury, no humiliation can destroy it.

The quality of persevering for your own sake, for your reputation or your sense of personal honor is good but over valued. Persevering with others for a common goal is not only more satisfying in the end, but teaches you something about life you might not have known before, and can influence your direction in ways your own fortitude never could. I once thought I was man enough for almost any confrontation. In prison, I discovered I was not. I tried to use every personal resource I had to confound my captors, and it wasn't enough in the end. But when I had reached the limit of my endurance, the men I had the honor of serving with picked me up, set me right, and sent me back into the fight. I became dependent on others to a greater extent than I had ever been before. And I am a better man for it. We had met a power that wanted to obliterate our identities, and the cause to which we rallied was our response: we are free men, bound inseparably together, and by the grace of God and not your sufferance we will have our freedom restored to us. I have never felt more powerfully free, more my own man, than when I was a small part of an organized resistance to the power that imprisoned us.

That lesson made me a better officer, too. When I came to Cecil Field and eventually assumed command of VA 174, the largest squadron in the Navy, the state of military readiness in the United States was very low. And my squadron's readiness was no exception. We had about fifty planes, and nearly half of them were in such bad shape they had been grounded. I was determined to improve the situation, but I knew my own determination wouldn't be sufficient to do so. I struck a deal with my superiors that if they allowed me to move parts from one plane to another, before my tour was finished we would have every one of them in the air. No plan to restore the squadron's readiness could have succeeded without the extraordinary determination and resourcefulness of the pilots, staff and crew I served with. They numbered nearly a thousand, and they were as highly committed, hardworking, innovative people as any officer ever had the honor to command. They worked diligently toward a common goal, and took pride in the achievements of a team and didn't view individual accomplishment as the primary focus of their energy. Of course, the squadron's purpose was to train aviators, but the men and women of VA 174 knew that they were serving a greater purpose: to demonstrate the resolve of the United States Navy to overcome the decline in morale and readiness that temporarily afflicted the military after the Vietnam War.

On the last day of my command, my Executive Officer and friend, Carl Smith, kept my promise to my superiors and took off in the last of the squadron's grounded planes. The plane was barely ready for the test and flew with its landing gear down. But we had achieved our goal. We had gotten every airplane off the ground, set a record for the longest flying hours without an accident, and received the first Meritorious Unit Citation ever awarded VA 174. The experience was the most rewarding assignment of my Navy career.

There are many qualities to military service that make it such a special profession. But among the most important is the ability to get things done no matter how difficult, confused or unexpected the situation. There is an old military maxim that battle plans never survive the first encounter with the enemy. Soldiers are taught to expect the unexpected and accept it, and revise, improvise, and fight their way through any adversity. That doesn't mean the soldier doesn't grumble or complain about unexpected changes in their fortunes, but they are trained to get things done no matter the circumstances.

That is an ethic that should imbue all public service in this country, and it should be the quality all Americans demand from their elected leaders. We are the most accomplished nation in history, and our system of government is superior to any other. But we have much to do in this historically pivotal era of great change and challenge, to ensure, as every preceding American generation has, that the country we leave our children is even better than the one we inherited.

To keep our nation prosperous, strong and growing we have to rethink, reform and reinvent: the way we educate our children; train our workers; deliver health care services; support retirees; fuel our transportation network; stimulate research and development; and harness new technologies.

To defend ourselves we must do everything better and smarter than we did before. We must rethink, renew and rebuild the structure and mission of our military; the capabilities of our intelligence and law enforcement agencies; the purposes of our alliances, the reach and scope of our diplomacy, and the capacities of all branches of government to defend us against the peril we now face. We need to marshal all elements of American power: our military, economy, investment, trade and technology. We need to strengthen our alliances, and build support in other nations, which must, whether they believe it or not, confront the same threat to their way of life that we do.

We must also prepare, across all levels of government, far better than we have done, to respond quickly and effectively to another terrorist attack or natural calamity. I am not an advocate of big government, and the private sector has an important role to play in homeland security. But when Americans confront a catastrophe, either natural or man-made, their government, across jurisdictions, should be organized and ready to deliver bottled drinking water to dehydrated babies and rescue the aged and infirm trapped in a hospital with no electricity.

We can leave these difficult problems to our unlucky successors, after they've grown worse, and harder to fix. Or we can bring all parties to the table, and hammer out principled solutions to the challenges of our time:

to strengthen our military, intelligence, diplomacy, and law enforcement and use the power of American ideals and commerce to win the war against violent extremists, and help the majority of Muslims who believe in progress and peace to win the struggle for the soul of Islam;

to balance the federal budget not with smoke and mirrors but by encouraging economic growth and preventing government from spending your money on things it shouldn't; to hold it accountable for the money it does spend on services that only government can provide in ways that don't fail and embarrass you;

to save Social Security and Medicare on our watch without the tricks, band-aid solutions, lies and posturing that have failed us for too long while the problem became harder and harder to solve;

to make our tax code simpler, fairer, flatter, more pro-growth and pro-jobs;

to reduce our dangerous dependence on foreign sources of oil with an energy policy that encourages American industry and technology to make our country safer, cleaner and more prosperous by leading the world in the use, development and discovery of alternative sources of energy;

to open new markets to American goods and services, create more and better jobs for the American worker and overhaul unemployment insurance and our redundant and outmoded programs for assisting workers who have lost a job that's not coming back to find a job that won't go away;

to help Americans without health insurance acquire it without bankrupting the country, and ruining the quality of American health care that is the envy of the world;

to make our public schools more accountable to parents and better able to meet the critical responsibility they have to prepare our children for the challenges they'll face in the world they'll lead.

We are not a perfect nation. Our history has had its moments of shame and profound regret. But what we have achieved in our brief history is irrefutable proof that a nation conceived in liberty will prove stronger, more decent and more enduring than any nation ordered to exalt the few at the expense of the many or made from a common race or culture or to preserve traditions that have no greater attribute than longevity.

But as blessed as we are, no nation complacent in its greatness can long sustain it. We, too, must prove, as those who came before us proved, capable of the work history has assigned us. Nothing is inevitable in America. Nothing. We're the world's leader, and leaders don't pine for the past and dread the future. We make the future better than the past. We don't hide from history. We make history. That, my friends, is the essence of hope in America, hope built on courage, and faith in the values that have made us great. I intend to make my stand on those principles and help move this country forward, to our future greatness, and trust in the judgment, decency and resolve of the people I have served all my life.

Thank you.

McCain Update, New Video

McCain has a new video out--http://www.johnmccain.com/service/day3_webvideo.htm

And he did two talks today. Here is the text.

U.S. Senator John McCain will deliver the following remarks as prepared for delivery during the third stop of his "Service to America" tour today at the United States Naval Academy in Annapolis, Maryland at 9:15 a.m. EST:

Thank you. I am very happy to be here. Annapolis holds a special place in my life, and in the years that have passed since my father drove me to the gates of the Naval Academy to begin my plebe year, memories of my experiences here are often bathed in the welcome haze of nostalgia for the time when I was brave and true and better looking than I am at present. But witnesses to my behavior here, a few of whom are present today, as well as a nagging conscience, have a tendency to interrupt my reverie for a misspent youth, and urge a more honest appraisal of my record and character here. In truth, my four years at the Naval Academy were not notable for exemplary virtue or academic achievement but, rather, for the impressive catalogue of demerits I managed to accumulate. By my reckoning, at the end of my second class year, I had marched enough extra duty to take me to Baltimore and back seventeen times -- which, if not a record, certainly ranks somewhere very near the top.

Never in my wildest flights of youthful fancy did I imagine I would one day be honored to give the commencement address at the Academy as I was some years ago. And, certainly, no matter how inflated was my self-regard as a midshipman, it could never have admitted the prospect that I would someday return to the banks of the Severn as a candidate for President of the United States. My old company officer, who for four years devoted himself to tracking my nocturnal sojourns outside the walls of the Academy and my other petty acts of insubordination, would have certainly shared my skepticism. But in the intervening years and experiences, I have learned what a young man seldom appreciates: that life is rich with irony and unexpected twists of fate, and is all the more fascinating for them. And I learned this, too: that my accomplishments are more a testament to my country, the land of opportunity, than they are to me. In America , everything is possible.

I had a difficult time my plebe year adjusting to the discipline imposed on me, which included, of course, deference to officers and instructors, but to other midshipmen, whose only accomplishment entitling them to my obedience, I thought at the time, was to have been born a year or more before me. I was something of a discipline problem to begin with. The problem being, I didn't like discipline. And that childish impulse that seemed then so important to my self-respect; to protecting the individualism I had been at pains to assert throughout my itinerant childhood, encouraged my irreverence to some of the customs of this place.

It's funny, now, how less self-assured I feel later in life than I did when I lived in the perpetual springtime of youth. Some of my critics allege that age hasn't entirely cost me my earlier conceits. All I can say to them is they should have known me then. But as the great poet, Yeats, wrote, "All that's beautiful drifts away, like the waters." I've lost some of the attributes that were the object of a young man's vanity. But there have been compensations, which I have come to hold dear.

If I had ignored some of the less important conventions of the Academy, I was careful not to defame its more compelling traditions: the veneration of courage and resilience; the honor code that simply assumed your fidelity to its principles; the homage paid to Americans who had sacrificed greatly for our country; the expectation that you, too, would prove worthy of your country's trust.

Appearances to the contrary, it was never my intention to mock a revered culture that expected better of me. Like any other midshipman, I wanted to prove my mettle to my contemporaries and to the institution that figured so prominently in my family history. My idiosyncratic methods amounted to little more than the continued expressions of the truculence I had used at other schools to fend off what I had wrongly identified as attacks on my dignity.

The Naval Academy was not interested in degrading my dignity. On the contrary, it had a more expansive conception of human dignity than I possessed when I arrived at its gates. The most important lesson I learned here was that to sustain my self-respect for a lifetime it would be necessary for me to have the honor of serving something greater than my self-interest.

When I left the Academy, I was not even aware I had learned that lesson. In a later crisis, I would suffer a genuine attack on my dignity, an attack, unlike the affronts I had exaggerated as a boy, that left me desperate and uncertain. It was then I would recall, awakened by the example of men who shared my circumstances, the lesson that the Academy in its venerable and enduring way had labored to impress upon me. It changed my life forever. I had found my cause: citizenship in the greatest nation on earth.

Like most people, when I reflect back on the adventures and joys of youth, I feel a longing for what is lost and cannot be restored. But though such happy pursuits prove ephemeral, something better can endure, and endure until our last moment on earth. And that is the honor you earn and the love you give when you sacrifice with others for a cause greater than yourself.

Our civilization's progress is accelerated by the information-technology revolution that ranks with the industrial revolution as a great pivot point in history. All around the world, the dynamics of the new economy: the internet, the communications revolution and globalization are transforming the way we work and create value; the way we govern ourselves -- or others presume to govern us; the way we live.

But even as we stand today, at the threshold of an age in which the genius of America will, I am confident, again be proven -- the genius that historian Frederick Turner called "that restless, nervous energy; that dominant individualism ... that buoyancy and exuberance which comes with freedom" -- many Americans are indifferent to or cynical about the virtues that our country claims. In part, it is attributable to the dislocations economic change causes; to the experience of Americans who have, through no fault of their own, been left behind as others profit as they never have before. In part, it is in reaction to government's mistakes and incompetence, and to the selfishness of some public figures who seek to shine the luster of their public reputations at the expense of the public good. But for others, cynicism about our country, government, social and religious institutions seems not a reaction to occasions when they hav e been let down by these institutions, but because the ease which wealth and opportunity have given their lives led them to the mistaken conclusion that America, and the liberties its system of government is intended to protect, just aren't important to the quality of their lives.

I'm a conservative, and I believe it is a very healthy thing for Americans to be skeptical about the purposes and practices of public officials. We shouldn't expect too much from government -- nor should it expect too much from us. Self-reliance -- not foisting our responsibilities off on others -- is the ethic that made America great.

But when healthy skepticism sours into corrosive cynicism our expectations of our government become reduced to the delivery of services. And to some people the expectations of liberty are reduced to the right to choose among competing brands of designer coffee.

What is lost is, in a word, citizenship. For too many Americans, the idea of good citizenship does not extend beyond walking into a voting booth every two or four years and pulling a lever. And too few Americans demand of themselves even that first obligation of self-government.

But citizenship properly understood is what Ronald Reagan was talking about when he said that Americans "are a nation that has a government -- not the other way around." Citizenship is not just the imposition of the mundane duties of democracy. Nor is it the unqualified entitlement to the protections and services of the state.

Citizenship thrives in the communal spaces where government is absent. Anywhere Americans come together to govern their lives and their communities -- in families, churches, synagogues, museums, symphonies, the Little League, the Boy Scouts, the Girl Scouts, the Salvation Army or the VFW -- they are exercising their citizenship.

Citizenship is defined by countless acts of love, kindness and courage that have no witness or heraldry and are especially commendable because they are unrecorded.

Although it exists apart from government, citizenship is the habits and institutions that preserve democracy. It is the ways, small and large, we come together to govern ourselves. Citizenship is the responsible exercise of freedom, and is indispensable to the proper functioning of a democracy.

The English writer G.K. Chesterton once wrote that America is a "nation with the soul of a church." What he meant is that America is not a race or a people but an idea -- a place where the only requirement for membership is a belief in the principles of liberty, opportunity and equality under the law on which this nation was founded.

Citizenship is our acceptance of -- and our protection of -- these principles. It is the duties, the loyalties, the inspirations and the habits of mind that bind us together as Americans.

We are the heirs and caretakers of freedom; a blessing preserved with the blood of heroes down through the ages. One cannot go to Arlington Cemetery and see name upon name, grave upon grave, row upon row, without being deeply moved by the sacrifice made by those young men and women.

And those of us who live in this time, who are the beneficiaries of their sacrifice, dare not forget what they did and why they did it, lest we lose our own love of liberty.

Love of country, my friends, is another way of saying love of your fellow countrymen -- a truth I learned a long time ago in a country very different from ours.

That is the good cause that summons every American to service. If you find faults with our country, make it a better one. If you are disappointed with the mistakes of government, join its ranks and work to correct them. I hope more Americans would consider enlisting in our Armed Forces. I hope more would consider running for public office or working in federal, state and local governments. But there are many public causes where your service can make our country a stronger, better one than we inherited. Wherever there is a hungry child, a great cause exists. Where there is an illiterate adult, a great cause exists. Wherever there are people who are denied the basic rights of Man, a great cause exists. Wherever there is suffering, a great cause exists.

The good citizen and wise person pursues happiness that is greater than comfort, more sublime than pleasure. The cynical and indifferent know not what they miss. For their mistake is an impediment not only to our progress as a civilization but to their happiness as individuals.

As blessed as we are, no nation complacent in its greatness can long sustain it. We, too, must prove, as those who came before us proved, that a people free to act in their own interests, will perceive those interests in an enlightened way, will live as one nation, in a kinship of ideals, and make of our power and wealth a civilization for the ages, a civilization in which all people share in the promise and responsibilities of freedom.

Should we claim our rights and leave to others the duty to the ideals that protect them, whatever we gain for ourselves will be of little lasting value. It will build no monuments to virtue, claim no honored place in the memory of posterity, offer no worthy summons to the world. Success, wealth and celebrity gained and kept for private interest is a small thing. It makes us comfortable, eases the material hardships our children will bear, purchases a fleeting regard for our lives, yet not the self-respect that, in the end, matters most. But sacrifice for a cause greater than yourself, and you invest your life with the eminence of that cause, your self-respect assured.

All lives are a struggle against selfishness. All my life I've stood a little apart from institutions that I had willingly joined. It just felt natural to me. But if my life had shared no common purpose, it would not have amounted to much more than eccentric. There is no honor or happiness in just being strong enough to be left alone. As one of my potential opponents often observes, I've spent fifty years in the service of this country and its ideals. I have made many mistakes, and I have my share of regrets. But I've never lived a day, in good times or bad, that I wasn't grateful for the privilege. That's the benefit of service to a country that is an idea and a cause, a righteous idea and cause. America and her ideals helped spare me the worst consequences of the deficiencies in my character. And I cannot forget it.

When I was a young man, I thought glory was the highest attainment, and all glory was self-glory. My parents had tried to teach me otherwise, as did the Naval Academy. But I didn't understand the lesson until later in life, when I confronted challenges I never expected to face.

In that confrontation, I discovered that I was dependent on others to a greater extent than I had ever realized, but neither they nor the cause we served made any claims on my identity. On the contrary, they gave me a larger sense of myself than I had ever had before. And I am a better man for it. I discovered that nothing in life is more liberating than to fight for a cause that encompasses you but is not defined by your existence alone. And that has made all the difference, my friends, all the differences in the world.

Thank you.

ARLINGTON, VA -- U.S. Senator John McCain will deliver the following remarks as prepared for delivery during the fourth stop of his "Service to America" tour today at the Pensacola Junior College in Pensacola, Florida at 4:00 p.m. EST:

Thank you. On the day I graduated from the Naval Academy and received my commission, I listened to President Eisenhower deliver the commencement address. I admired President Eisenhower very much. But I must admit I remember little of his remarks, impatient as I was to enjoy the other celebrations of the day and mindful that given my undistinguished class standing I would not have the privilege of shaking the President's hand. I do recall, vaguely, that he encouraged his audience of Navy ensigns and Marine lieutenants to become "crusaders for peace."

I came to Pensacola to become an aviator, and, eventually, an instrument of war for my country. I have very happy memories of my time here. It is hard to imagine how I could not have happy memories of this place. I was a very young man entering a very exciting profession with few priorities greater than my own amusement. Of course, my interests then were focused more on cultivating the image of a naval aviator that strongly appealed to my vanity than on becoming proficient in my chosen profession and understanding the purposes and full meaning of the duty to my country that came with my commission. I wanted to live the life of a daring, brash, fun-loving flyer, indifferent to the hazards of his profession, calm and stoic when the adrenalin flowed, fatalistic about life and death situations, and determined to live every non dangerous moment of his life to the fullest.

I thought that image, which I doubt I ever quite perfected, would prove irresistible to everyone I knew, and especially so to girls whose attention I sought. There are compensations to growing older, my friends, but the late discovery that you were probably not quite the charming, irresistible young man you once believed you were, but rather callow, conceited and often stupid is not among them. In truth, the image I aspired to was, in the end, only irresistible to one person -- me, and it was a very childish attraction. It was little different than playing soldiers when I was a boy, except the government provided me an attractive uniform, a small salary, and a real and expensive airplane, which they eventually let me fly, catapulting me from the deck of a pitching aircraft carrier and expecting me, and more importantly my airplane, to return safely to the same place. I know better now what I was really being prepared to bec ome. But that sign of maturity, like so many others, had to wait for the self-awareness that comes from having a place in a real, not an imaginary world; a world that made short work of childhood dreams of glamour. That is not to say, however, that my time in Pensacola wasn't as fun as I thought it was at the time. My memories of this place are happy ones for a reason. I enjoyed every single moment of my life here, from learning to fly to blowing my pay at Trader Johns. But I was sent here for more serious purposes than that, and it would take me a while to understand that.

It will surprise no one that I think service in the United States Armed Forces to be among the highest expressions of patriotism and the most personally rewarding experiences. For many years the United States Navy was the only world I knew, and, all these years later, it is still the world I know best and love most. After I earned my wings, I served in squadrons in the Atlantic Fleet, on board the Intrepid and Enterprise. Mediterranean cruises and their ports of call in Europe were pleasant duty for young, single aviators, and I made the most of it. And much of my affection for the Navy, and my love of flying off carriers was still a reflection of childhood daydreams, stimulated by long afternoons in my grandmother's house reading about the exploits of heroes, fictional and real, and craving the kinds of adventures they had. I had wanted a life of adventure, and while visiting the Isle of Capri or the casinos of Monte Carlo seemed fairly adventurous at the time, I knew my ultimate adventure would have to be in more challenging circumstances than those I had thus far experienced. My idea of war, which was not derived from personal experience, hadn't advanced much further than the way I had conceived it as a boy: the biggest adventure of all. That romantic conception would also have to wait for later experiences to teach me just how foolish an idea it was.

Although, I still possessed immature notions about military service, I had started to feel the need to move on, a natural impulse for me. I was, at least beginning to desire a more serious reputation. Like my father and grandfather, I came to love life at sea. I volunteered for bridge watches and qualified as an "officer on the deck underway," capable of commanding a carrier at sea. My reputation did not improve all that much, as much of it still rested on my more self-indulgent behavior. I once knocked down power lines in southern Spain, flying too low for no good reason, and temporarily cut the electricity to a great many Spanish homes. But I began to give my superiors some reason to think I might eventually prove myself, if not as gifted an officer as my father and grandfather had been, perhaps competent enough not to squander entirely my legacy.

In October of 1962, I had just returned from a Mediterranean cruise aboard the Enterprise. My squadron had flown off the carrier for Oceana Naval Station, where we would train out of land bases until our next deployment.

A few days after our return, we unexpectedly received orders to fly our planes back to the Enterprise. Our superiors told us that a hurricane was coming, and the carrier needed to put out to sea to avoid damage. That aroused our curiosity since none of us had heard any forecast of an approaching hurricane. In addition to the A-1s we flew, the Enterprise carried long-range attack planes, which typically had a hard time managing carrier take-offs and landings. We embarked on our mysterious deployment without them.

As the Enterprise passed Cherry Point, Virginia, a Marine squadron of A-4s approached and attempted to land. I watched the scene from the air tower. Several of the pilots had considerable difficulty trying to land. Our air boss turned to a Marine officer and told him we didn't have time to wait for all their planes to land; some of them would have to return to base. The Marine replied that the planes didn't have enough fuel left to return to base and would have to land on the carrier.

I was puzzled by the apparent urgency of our mission. We had been hustled back to the carrier, leaving some of our planes behind; and deploying the Marine squadron with only enough fuel to land or ditch. Clearly, something big was underway. The mystery was solved a short while later when we all assembled in the ready room to listen to a broadcast of President Kennedy informing the nation that the Soviets were basing nuclear missiles in Cuba.

The Enterprise, sailing at full speed under nuclear power, was the first carrier to reach the waters off Cuba. For about five days, we believed we were going into action. We had never been in combat before, and despite the global confrontation a strike on Cuba portended, we were prepared and anxious to fly our first combat mission. Flyers and crewmen alike adopted a cool-headed, business-as-usual attitude toward our mission, but inwardly we were as excited as we could be.

After five days the tension eased, as it became apparent the crisis would be resolved peacefully. We weren't disappointed to be denied our first experience of war, but our appetites were whetted and our imaginations fueled. We all looked forward to the occasion when we would finally have the chance to do what we had been trained to do, and discover, at last, if we were brave enough for the job.

But I had also begun to recognize that military service and war were more than an adventure for boys with vivid imaginations and a measure of audacity. They offered admission into history, possibly a big part of history, a much more daunting enterprise than proving one's mettle and with much greater things at stake than personal reputation or even the life and death of soldiers. The Cuban Missile Crisis could have caused a nuclear war, and we had been part of our country's response to the threat, but used in such a way to help forestall a chain of events from running to that terrible conclusion.

I cannot say I had completely lost my self-centered conception of my duty. For that I had to have a more expansive view of my country. I loved my country then and now. And I was reasonably well-read in history, and certainly grasped the uniqueness of America, a country not rooted in land and blood, but in an idea, an inspiring and noble idea. But, as Americans often do, my appreciation of the country was more focused on the many advantages and opportunities of American life. Yet that early experience I had with a genuinely historic crisis gave me a greater perspective on what I had truly committed myself to, even as a very junior officer. The defense of my country was important not only to the security of my countrymen and the blessings of life in America. It was important to the world: to the peace and stability of the world and to advancing in a hostile world those ideals we believe are universal. I was part of that great cause, a small and unessential part, but a part nonetheless. And to serve it as well as it deserves I would have to learn to subordinate personal ambitions and conceits, even parts of your nature that you pride yourself on, to a much more important good. Of course, I didn't grasp the full import of this revelation until some years later, when my time at war finally arrived.

I have long argued that the United States must significantly increase the size of our Army and Marine Corps. I think the security challenges we face today absolutely require it. The former Secretary of Defense disagreed, and we waited too long to begin that build-up. Had we begun to do it right after 9/11, as we realized that we were now in a global struggle against a malicious enemy, or as we embarked on two wars, or even when it became clear to many of us that our flawed strategy and inadequate troop levels in Iraq were going to result in that conflict lasting far longer than anticipated, we would not be in the situation we are in now. The strain our involvement in Iraq has placed on the readiness of our military would not be so acute. But that is the past, and while we can argue about it indefinitely, it won't solve the problem we now confront. We must increase the size of our military, and much more so than we have done to date. It is an urgent priority.

Obviously, that is going to require greater numbers of Americans to serve than have recently showed a willingness to do. We can issue appeals to Americans to accept their responsibilities to the country as previous generations have. We could institute a draft, but that is neither necessary nor desirable. We could and should call on universities to allow ROTC a presence on their campuses. That they are frequently denied that privilege is disgraceful. The United States military defends the freedom of all of us, including students and professors at leading institutes of higher learning. For some of those same institutions to refuse to allow future officers, who will one day risk their lives to protect us, to train for their responsibilities on their campuses is unfair, ungrateful and very poor citizenship.

I want every American to know that, despite its attendant risks and sacrifices, military service even for one or two enlistments or for a career is one of the most rewarding experiences you could ever have. Make no mistake, those risks and sacrifices are great and daunting even in peacetime. But few other occupations so completely invest your life with personal and even historic importance.

What we have achieved in this country is very much worth defending; worth even the most terrible sacrifices. The thought that any American wouldn't believe that saddens me. We are so invested in the world. Our prosperity, our safety, cannot be protected by retiring from a troublesome world, and building imagined walls to the progress of history. It was our founding belief that America and the world would be far better places were the natural and inalienable rights of life and liberty, the principles of free people and free markets, possessed by all humanity. And we have sacrificed greatly to secure those rights for people we never knew in places we had never heard of before. We have done so in defense of our interests as well as our ideals, but we have done so. Very few other nations can make that claim.

We are blessed to be Americans, not just in times of peace and prosperity. We are part of something providential: a great experiment to prove to the world that democracy is not only the most effective form of government, but the only moral government. And through the years, generation after generation of Americans have held fast to the belief that we were meant to transform history. What greater cause than that could we ever find? The global advance of our ideals is not the first responsibility of our military. Our military is not always the best instrument of that cause, though it has certainly served it of necessity and at great sacrifice. But the defense of our possession of them is their responsibility. And no other profession has done that so admirably, so selflessly as the United States Armed Forces. I wish all Americans the experience of such sublime service to a greater good that I was very lucky to have once had, a nd which began in practice, here, in Pensacola. Thank you.

McCain in Mississippi

U.S. Senator John McCain will deliver the following remarks as prepared for delivery during the first stop of his "Service to America" tour today in Meridian, Mississippi:

Thank you. It's good to be back in Meridian. As you might know, I was once a flight instructor here at the air field named for my grandfather during my long past and misspent youth. And it's always good to be in Mississippi, which you could call my ancestral home. Generations of McCains were born and raised in Carroll County, on land that had been in our family since 1848. The last McCain to live on the property, which the family called Teoc, was my grandfather's brother, Joe McCain. I spent a couple summers here as a young boy, and enjoyed it immensely. I had never had a permanent address because my father's naval career required us to move frequently. But here, in the care of my very likeable Uncle Joe, I could imagine, with a little envy, what it must have been like for the McCains who came before me to be so connected to one place; to be part of a community and a landscape as well as a family.

By all accounts, the McCains of Carroll County were devoted to one another and their traditions; a lively, proud and happy family on the Mississippi Delta. Yet, many McCains left here as young men to pursue careers in what has long been our family's chosen profession -- the United States Armed Forces. My great-grandfather was the sheriff and never left. But his brother, Henry Pinkney McCain, was a major general in the Army, and organized the draft in World War One. Camp McCain in Grenada, Mississippi is named for him. My great uncle, William McCain, was known as "Wild Bill" for his "dynamic" personality -- he was reputed to have ridden his horse onto his future father-in-law's porch to ask him for his daughter's hand. He chased Pancho Villa with General Pershing, was an artillery officer in World War One, and retired a Brigadier General. Both men are buried at Arlington National Cemetery, as are my father and grandfather. We trace my family's martial heritage back to the Revolution. A distant ancestor served on General Washington's staff, and it seems my ancestors fought in most wars in our nation's history. All were soldiers -- both Henry and Bill McCain were West Pointers -- until my grandfather broke family tradition and entered the Naval Academy in 1902. He was succeeded there by my father, then me, and then my son.

As I noted, the naval air field here is named for my grandfather, who had an illustrious career in the Navy, and who remained proud of his Mississippi roots until the end of his life. I have only very early memories of him. I was just nine when he died. But he was an unforgettable man, a lively, colorful, though infrequent, presence in our lives. To spend time in his company was as much fun as a young boy could imagine. He loved his family, and we were spellbound by him. He was a slight man and gaunt, but he filled any room with his deep voice and high spirits. He was devoted to the Navy, but in personal comportment, he was anything but regulation. He was a rumpled, informal man, who wore a crushed cap with the crown removed that the wife of one of his aviators had given him; kept his shoes off when he worked in an office; tobacco leavings were always scattered about him, as he rolled his own with one hand; possessed a mischievous sense of humor, and was unusually close to sailors and junior officers who served under him, and revered him. They called him, "Popeye;" his family called him, "Sid;" and his fellow officers, "Slew," for reasons I never learned

After graduating from the Naval Academy, he sailed around the Philippine Islands on a gunboat captured from the Spanish, the executive officer to the great Chester Nimitz. He returned to the United States on the U.S.S. Connecticut, the flagship of Teddy Roosevelt's Great White Fleet. He served on an armored cruiser in the First World War, escorting wartime convoys across the U-boat infested Atlantic. In 1935, after the Navy ordered that all aircraft carrier skippers must themselves have earned their wings, he trained as a pilot. He was 52 years old at the time, and a Navy Captain. By his own admission, he never learned to fly well. A subordinate recalled later, "the base prayed for his safe return each time he flew." But he managed to earn his wings, and left Pensacola to command the naval air station in the Panama Canal Zone, where I was born.

My father, Jack McCain, was an officer at a submarine base there, one of the few occasions in his adult life when he lived in close proximity to the man he admired above all others. Though they lived far apart for decades, no father and son could have been closer. My father described his father as "a very great leader and people loved him. ... the blood of life flowed through his veins ... a man of great moral and physical courage." He had learned everything about leadership from his father, he said. Both were highly individualistic men with outsize personalities, but were completely dedicated to the United States Navy. Neither ever wanted any other life, and while both were guilty of more than a few regulation infractions, and shared a few vices, they adhered strictly to the code father had taught son: never lie, steal or cheat. Both took a great interest in the views and well-being of the men who served under them. They believed military leaders learned as much from the people they commanded as they taught them. They were demanding, but fair and compassionate commanders. "We are responsible for our men," my father once said, "not the other way around. That's what forges trust and loyalty." They shirked no duty, braved extraordinary dangers, and were exceptional leaders. They were the first father and son to become four star admirals.

My grandfather commanded the fast carrier task force in the Pacific under Admiral Halsey, and devised many of the tactics that were employed by carriers for many years after. He was instrumental in Japan's defeat, and was given a privileged place on the deck of the U.S.S. Missouri to witness the signing of the unconditional surrender that ended the war. My father commanded a submarine in the Pacific during the war, survived several harrowing experiences, and had brought a Japanese submarine into Tokyo Harbor at the time of the surrender ceremony. Both were exhausted at war's end, but happy to have the opportunity for a brief reunion. They met onboard a submarine tender, and spent a couple of hours together. My grandfather was worn out and obviously ill. Years later, my father recalled the last words my grandfather had ever spoken to him. "Son, there is no greater thing than to die ... for the country and principles that you believe in." After father and son parted that afternoon, my grandfather began the long trip home to Coronado. Not long after he arrived, at a homecoming party, he turned to my grandmother, and announced he did not feel well. He died a moment later of a heart attack. He had fought his war and died in service to the country he believed in.

My father could not return to the States in time for the funeral. My mother found him waiting for her to return to California from the funeral in Washington, weeping on the airport tarmac. In time, my father, the son of a legendary naval leader, would rise to an even greater command than his father had. During the Vietnam War, he commanded all U.S. forces in the Pacific, at the top of a chain of command that included, near the bottom, his son, a naval aviator on Yankee Station in the Tonkin Gulf, and later a prisoner of war in Hanoi. My father seldom spoke of my captivity to anyone outside the family, and never in public. He prayed on his knees every night for my safe return. He would spend holidays with the troops in Vietnam, near the DMZ. At the end of his visit, he would walk alone to the base perimeter, and look north toward the city where I was held. Yet, when duty required it, he gave the order for B-52s to bomb Hanoi, in close proximity to my prison.

I have lived a blessed life, and the first of my blessings was the family I was born into. I had not only the example of my distinguished male relations, and their long tradition of military service. I was fortunate to grow up under the influence of strong, capable, accomplished women; first among them, my mother, the formidable Roberta McCain; her identical twin, Rowena; my strict and imposing paternal grandmother, Catherine; and equally impressive maternal grandmother, Myrtle. For much of my childhood, my mother was the parent who raised me, my sister and brother. My father was often at sea, and she bore all the responsibilities of both parents. She moved us from base to base, often driving us across country on her own; managed our household; paid the bills; saw to our education and religious upbringing; and made of our itinerant childhood, an interesting, exciting time, rich with fascinating experiences. She was and is a resilient woman, extroverted, uncomplaining, forthright and determined, who greets every challenge as an opportunity to measure one's strength of character and learn about the wider world beyond our immediate environment.

The family I was born to, and the family I am blessed with now, made me the man I am, and instilled in me a deep and abiding respect for the social institution that wields the greatest influence in the formation of our individual character and the character of our society. I may have been raised in a time when government did not dare to assume the responsibilities of parents. But I am a father in a time when parents worry that threats to their children's well-being are proliferating and undermining the values they have worked to impart to them. That is not to say that government should dictate to parents how to raise their children or assume from parents any part of that most personal and important responsibility. No government is capable of caring for children as attentively and wisely as the mother and father who love them. But government must be attentive to the impact of its policies on families so that it does not through inattention or arrogance make it harder for parents to have the resources to succeed in the greatest work of their lives -- raising their children. And where government has a role to play, in education, in combating the threats to the security and happiness of children from online predators, in helping to make health care affordable and accessible to the least fortunate among us, it must do so urgently, effectively and wisely.

Tax policy must not rob parents of the means to care for their children and provide them the opportunities their parents provided them. Government spending must not be squandered on things we do not need and can't afford, and which don't address a single American's concern for their family's security. Government can't just throw money at public education while reinforcing the failures of many of our schools, but should, through choice and competition, by rewarding good teachers and holding bad teachers accountable, help parents prepare their children for the challenges and opportunities of the global economy. Government must be attentive to the impact on families of parents who have lost jobs in our changing economy that won't come back. Our programs for displaced workers are antiquated, repetitive and ineffective. Many were designed for a time when unemployment was seasonal or a temporary consequence of an economic downturn, not for a time when systemic changes wrought by the growing global economy have, while promising undreamt of opportunities for ourselves and many historically poor societies, have cost too many parents the jobs they had assumed would be theirs for life.

With the loss of work and the resources it provides families, come just as injurious losses to the emotional health of families. Work provides more than an income. It is a source of self-worth, pride and sense of purpose. Children learn as much from observation as instruction. The mother or father who has lost hope along with their job can unintentionally impart that hopelessness to their children. A welfare check can't give a parent a sense of purpose. And among the most important things children can inherit from their parents is a sense of purpose, and an aspiration to be part of something bigger than themselves.

My parents taught me that, and I will always be indebted to them. But like many young people, I didn't understand the lesson very well until later in life when I needed it most. As a boy, my family legacy, as fascinating as it was to me, often felt like an imposition. I knew from a very early age that I was destined for Annapolis and a career in the Navy. In reaction, I often rebelled in small and petty ways to what I perceived as an encroachment on my free will.

I concede that I remember with affection the unruly passions of youth, and how they governed my immature sense of honor and self-respect. As I grew older, and the challenges to my self-respect grew more varied and serious, I was surprised to discover that while my sense of honor had matured, its defense mattered even more to me than it did when it was such a vulnerable thing that any empty challenge threatened it.

Like most people, when I reflect on the adventures and joys of youth, I feel a longing for what is lost and cannot be restored. But though the happy pursuits of the young prove ephemeral, something better can endure, and endure until our last moment of life. And that is the honor we earn and the love we give when we work and sacrifice with others for a cause greater than our self-interest. For me that cause has long been our country. I am a lucky, lucky man to have found it, and am forever grateful to those who showed me the way. What they gave me was much more valuable and lasting than the tribute I once paid to vanity.

I am the son and grandson of admirals. My grandfather was an aviator; my father a submariner. They were my first heroes, and their respect for me has been one of the most lasting ambitions of my life. They gave their lives to their country, and taught me lessons about honor, courage, duty, perseverance and leadership that I didn't fully grasp until later in life, but remembered when I needed them most. I have been an imperfect servant of my country for many years. But I am their son, and they showed me how to love my country, and that has made all the difference for me, my friends, all the difference in the world.

Nader Says Send the Bush Twins to Iraq

This is an email I got from Nadar today.

President Bush believes that the war in Iraq is "worth the sacrifice."

The question then becomes - sacrifice by whom?

What about George Bush's daughters - Jenna and Barbara?

Prince Harry served in Afghanistan.

Senator Jim Webb and Senator John McCain each have a son who has served in Iraq.

During World War II four of Franklin Delano Roosevelt's sons entered the armed forces, as did General Eisenhower's son, John Eisenhower.

No double standard for them.

So, why not Jenna and Barbara Bush?

And why not military service for the children of all members of Congress - who have funded this criminal war in Iraq?

There is a certain moral authority to govern - setting an example - sharing in the sacrifice initiated by the White House - that escape George W. Bush and Dick Cheney and their enablers in Congress.

They have children who have declined to serve during the Iraq war.

While almost four thousand young American men and women have died in this needless, criminal war.

And tens of thousands have been seriously injured.

Why the double standard?

We have a simple cure for this double standard.

It's called - draft at the top.

Pass a law that says this - whenever Congress and the White House take our country to war, all able-bodied military-age children of every member of Congress, the President and the Vice-President will be conscripted automatically into the armed forces.

Nader/Gonzalez supports draft at the top.

Clinton/Obama/McCain are opposed.

As we tour the country, seeking to get Nader/Gonzalez on the ballot, we will gather support for the draft at the top proposal.

To do this, we need your help.

As you know, we are in the middle of a drive to get Nader/Gonzalez on the ballot all across the country.

This week, we're working on Arizona.

Over four days, we have raised more than $27,000 from 360 donors.

Thank you.

We are halfway to our goal.

We now only need 230 of your to donate $100 each and we will meet our goal of $50,000.

Our troops are waiting in Arizona for a signal to begin gathering the 40,000 signatures - which they must gather by June 4.

McCain on Obama

"Senator Obama says that ending the war will not be easy, that 'there will be dangers involved.'  Yet, in that patented way of his, he declines to name those dangers.  Let me enumerate a few: al Qaeda, which is now on the run, will survive, claim victory and continue to provoke sectarian tensions that, while they have been subdued by the 'tactics' of the surge, still exist and are ripe for provocation by al Qaeda, which would almost certainly ignite again civil war in Iraq, a civil war that could easily descend into genocide.  To say that invading Iraq was used as a recruiting tool for al Qaeda is one thing.  To pretend that our defeat there won't provide an even bigger one is foolish supposition.  Iran, which trains Shia extremists and is known to arm and equip Sunni extremists, a fact Senator Obama is apparently unaware of, will also view our premature withdrawal as a victory, as will other countries in the region, and the biggest state supporter of terrorists, a country with nuclear ambitions and a stated desire to destroy the State of Israel, will see its influence in the Middle East grow significantly.  These are some of 'dangers,' that our premature withdrawal from Iraq will engender, and they all have the potential to destabilize the entire region.  A realistic plan to prevent them from occurring is what people with experience in statecraft call 'strategy,' something Senator Obama has not offered yet.

"Senator Obama, as has also become a habit of his 'new politics,' mischaracterizes John McCain's position by saying McCain did not want to reduce troops because the violence in Iraq was too high, and now do not wish to do so because the violence in down.  The reason violence is down is because General Petraeus' counterinsurgency is, which even Senator Obama recognizes, succeeding.  Those 'tactics,' are advancing our 'strategy.'  Deprive General Petraeus of the resources and manpower to employ those tactics, or worse, leave Iraq altogether, and our strategy will collapse.  That is national security 101.  John McCain wants American forces to come home when our clear and serious interests at stake in Iraq, which nearly 4,000 Americans have given their lives to secure, are truly safe, when al Qaeda is defeated; Iran's influence is contained, and the potential for a truly cataclysmic civil war in Iraq is remote.  That, I think, is what is called 'making us safer.'  Senator Obama's plan, if it can be charitably described as one, would do the reverse."

Barack Five Years Later (in Iraq)

I got this email from Barack Obama today.

Dear Caleb,

Five years ago today, President George W. Bush launched a war that should never have been authorized based on faulty premises and bad intelligence.

This war has now lasted longer than World War I, World War II, or the Civil War.
Nearly four thousand Americans have given their lives. Thousands more have been wounded. Even under the best-case scenarios, this war will cost American taxpayers well over a trillion dollars.

And where are we for all of this sacrifice?

We are less safe and less able to shape events abroad. We are divided at home, and our alliances around the world have been strained. The threats of a new century have roiled the waters of peace and stability, and yet America remains anchored in Iraq.
I am running for President because it's time to turn the page on a failed ideology and a fundamentally flawed political strategy, so that we can make pragmatic judgments to keep our country safe.

That's what I did when I stood up and opposed this war from the start and said that we needed to finish the fight against al Qaeda. And that's what I'll do as President of the United States.

Please take a few minutes to read my strategy for ending the war in Iraq and making America safer. I hope you will sign on and show your support: http://my.barackobama.com/fiveyearslater

Senator Clinton says that she and Senator McCain have passed a "Commander-in-Chief test" -- not because of the judgments they've made, but because of the years they've spent in Washington.

She made a similar argument when she said her vote for war was based on her experience at both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue.

But here is the stark reality: there is a security gap in this country -- a gap between the rhetoric of those who claim to be tough on national security, and the reality of growing insecurity caused by their decisions.

It is time to have a debate with Senator McCain about the future of our national security. And the way to win that debate and keep America safe is to offer a clear contrast -- a clean break from the failed policies and politics of the past.
Nowhere is that break more badly needed than in Iraq.

Join me in supporting an end to this war and a plan for a safer America:
http://my.barackobama.com/fiveyearslater

The judgment that matters most on Iraq -- and on any decision to deploy military force -- is the judgment made first.

If you believe we are fighting the right war, then the problems we face are purely tactical in nature. That is what Senator McCain wants to discuss -- tactics. What he and the Administration have failed to present is an overarching strategy: how the war in Iraq enhances our long-term security, or will in the future.

That's why this Administration cannot answer the simple question posed by Senator John Warner in hearings last year: Are we safer because of this war? And that is why Senator McCain can argue -- as he did last year -- that we couldn't leave Iraq because violence was up, and then argue this year that we can't leave Iraq because violence is down.

When you have no overarching strategy, there is no clear definition of success.
Success comes to be defined as the ability to maintain a flawed policy indefinitely. Here is the truth: fighting a war without end will not force the Iraqis to take responsibility for their own future. And fighting in a war without end will not make the American people safer.

When I am Commander-in-Chief, I will set a new goal on Day One: I will end this war. Not because politics compels it. Not because our troops cannot bear the burden -- as heavy as it is. But because it is the right thing to do for our national security, and it will ultimately make us safer.

Show your support for a clear strategy to end the war in Iraq and focus our national security efforts on making America safer: http://my.barackobama.com/fiveyearslater

Here are the core elements of my strategy to address our critical national security challenges in the 21st century: End the war in Iraq, removing our troops at a pace of 1 to 2 combat brigades per month; Finally finish the fight against the Taliban, root out al Qaeda and invest in the people of Afghanistan and Pakistan, while making aid to the Pakistani government conditional; Act aggressively to stop nuclear proliferation and to secure all loose nuclear materials around the world; Double our foreign assistance to cut extreme poverty in half; Invest in a clean energy future to wean the U.S. off of foreign oil and to lead the world against the threat of global climate change; Rebuild our military capability by increasing the number of soldiers, marines, and special forces troops, and insist on adequate training and time off between deployments; Renew American diplomacy by talking to our adversaries as well as our friends; increasing the size of the Foreign Service and the Peace Corps; and creating an America's Voice Corps.

Please take a minute to show your support for this plan:
http://my.barackobama.com/fiveyearslater

We are at a defining moment in our history.

This must be the election when America comes together behind a common purpose on behalf of our security and our values.

That is what we do as Americans. It's how we founded a republic based on freedom, and faced down fascism. It's how we defended democracy through a Cold War, and shined a light of hope bright enough to be seen in the darkest corners of the world.
When America leads with principle and pragmatism, hope can triumph over fear. It is time, once again, for America to lead.

Thank you,

Barack Obama

ON THE FIFTH ANNIVERSARY OF IRAQ INVASION

Here are statements by McCain followed by Nadar. No word from Hillary or Obama.

ARLINGTON, VA -- U.S. Senator John McCain today issued the following statement on the fifth anniversary of the U.S. invasion of Iraq:

"Today in Iraq, America and our allies stand on the precipice of winning a major victory against radical Islamic extremism. The security gains over the past year have been dramatic and undeniable. Al Qaeda and Shia extremists -- with support from external powers such as Iran -- are on the run but not defeated. Tough fighting remains ahead, especially in places like Mosul. Important political gains have also been made, but far more must be done in coming months to cement the gains made in huge cost in American blood and treasure.

"Americans should be proud that they led the way in removing a vicious, predatory dictator and opening the possibility of a free and stable Iraq. Americans should be proud that once we implemented the surge and new counterinsurgency strategy, a dire situation has been dramatically improved. And, Americans know that the consequences of failure would leave our nation less secure for generations to come."

John McCain's campaign today further re-released a web feature on www.johnmccain.com that chronicles the Senator's leadership on Iraq and in the larger fight against Islamic extremists. The page, entitled "Fighting Islamic Extremists: Progress in Iraq," features a four year timeline of John McCain's unrelenting call for a new strategy for victory in Iraq -- the strategy currently winning on the ground.

Visit JohnMcCain.com Website Feature: "Fighting Islamic Extremists: Progress in Iraq"

John McCain: "The Loudest Voice For A Change In Iraq," As He Was "Dead On In His Analysis Of What Went Wrong In Iraq"

The Weekly Standard's Fred Barnes: "The Loudest Voice For A Change In Iraq Was Senator John McCain Of Arizona." "But the loudest voice for a change in Iraq was Senator John McCain of Arizona. He and his sidekick, Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, traveled repeatedly to Iraq. McCain badgered Bush and Hadley with phone calls urging more troops and a different strategy. Together, McCain, Keane, Petraeus, the network of Army officers, and Kagan provided a supportive backdrop for adopting a new strategy." (Fred Barnes, "How Bush Decided On The Surge," The Weekly Standard, 2/4/08)

· Newsweek's Michael Hirsh: "As We Now Know Nearly Four Years Later, McCain Was Dead On In His Analysis Of What Went Wrong In Iraq." "In early November 2003, at a time when Fred Dalton Thompson was playing a tough D.A. on 'Law and Order,' John McCain was cross-examining Donald Rumsfeld for real on Capitol Hill. It was still very early into the U.S. occupation of Iraq, but the as-yet-unacknowledged (by Rummy, that is) insurgency was already out of control. Alone among his fellow GOP senators, McCain blasted Rumsfeld for not putting enough U.S. troops on the ground, and for resorting too soon to 'Iraqification' -- that is, transferring security to ill-prepared Iraqi forces. In an extraordinarily blunt speech at the Council on Foreign Relations that grim autumn, McCain warned that ultimately Iraq could become another Vietnam 'if we lose popular support in the United States.' The next day, the secretary of Defense asked McCain to breakfast. 'I read your speech,' harrumphed Rumsfeld (that 'must have been an enjoyable experience for him,' McCain later joked to me). Then Rummy patiently explained to his fellow Republican why he and his top civilian brass (Paul Wolfowitz, Doug Feith and the usual crowd of incompetents) would continue to do things the same way. They 'believed there was no need for additional troops,' McCain later related. McCain had already realized that Rumsfeld was a lost cause. The real question, the senator suggested to me back then, was whether George W. Bush himself would push Rummy to make changes. 'I'd like to see the president fully engaged,' McCain said. Bush needed to be on top of 'more details of what's going on.' As we now know nearly four years later, McCain was dead on in his analysis of what went wrong in Iraq. Right down to the need for Bush to get engaged and fire Rumsfeld. McCain was so right that, among military experts today, the emerging conventional wisdom about Bush's current 'surge' is that if it had occurred back then -- when McCain wanted it and the political will existed in this country to support it for the necessary number of years -- it might well have succeeded." (Michael Hirsh, "Why McCain's Collapse Matters," Newsweek, 7/26/07)

New Hampshire Union Leader: "Of All The Candidates For President, It Was John McCain And Only John McCain Who Not Only Opposed Donald Rumsfeld's Iraq Strategy From The Start But Offered A Viable Alternative For Winning ..." "Of all the candidates for President, it was John McCain and only John McCain who not only opposed Donald Rumsfeld's Iraq strategy from the start but offered a viable alternative for winning that ill-fated war. When the Democrats cried 'Retreat!' and other Republicans shouted 'Stay the course!' McCain listened to the commanders on the ground. He discerned the path to victory early, and only after the President finally did what McCain had urged for years did the tide begin to turn in our favor. That is the kind of judgment America needs in the oval office." (Editorial, "Commander In Chief: McCain Is The Best Choice," New Hampshire Union Leader, 12/25/07)

· Boston Herald: "McCain knew that the administration's early military strategy was not enough to get the job done. And he was among the first to sign on to this year's troop surge as devised by Gen. David Petraeus." (Editorial, "Choice Is Clear: McCain's The One," Boston Herald, 12/20/07)

John McCain: Fighting For A Winning Strategy In Iraq Since August 2003

Washington Post Headline, August 24, 2003: "McCain Says U.S. Needs More Money, Troops in Iraq." (Mike Allen, "McCain Says U.S. Needs More Money, Troops in Iraq," The Washington Post, 8/24/03)

· August 2003: "Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) said after visiting Baghdad last week that President Bush needs to level with the public about the need for more U.S. troops as well as dramatically more spending to make postwar Iraq peaceful enough for democracy to unfold. ... 'We need to tell the American people directly, and I think they'll support it,' McCain said from Islamabad, Pakistan. 'We must win this conflict. We need a lot more military, and I'm convinced we need to spend a lot more money.'" (Mike Allen, "McCain Says U.S. Needs More Money, Troops in Iraq," The Washington Post, 8/24/03)

November 2003: "To win in Iraq, we should increase the number of forces in-country, including Marines and Special Forces, to conduct offensive operations. I believe we must have in place another full division, giving us the necessary manpower to conduct a focused counterinsurgency campaign across the Sunni triangle that seals off enemy operating areas, conducts search and destroy operations and holds territory. Such a strategy would be the kind of new mission General Sanchez agreed would require additional forces. It's a mystery to me why they are not forthcoming. We cannot achieve our political goals as long as a strategic region of Iraq is in a state of fundamental insecurity." (John McCain, Remarks To Council On Foreign Relations, Washington, DC 11/5/03)

April 2004: "When I came back last August from Iraq, I said we needed more troops, thousands that were special forces, linguists, civil affairs type of people, that we'd be dealing with this new insurgency that we are now seeing in spades. Yes, I believe we need more, thousands more of the right kind of military personnel." (CNN's "Inside Politics," 4/6/04)

· April 2004: "I was there in last August and have said since then that we needed more troops, we need them very badly. We may be paying a price for not having had more troops there, and I feel sorry for these young men and women having to remain there, but they know their job and I'm sure they'll do it well." (John McCain, Remarks At Media Availability, Washington, DC, 4/11/04)

· April 2004: "[W]hen I was there in Iraq in August, I talked to [the] British. I talked to sergeant majors. I talked to colonels and captains. And I came back absolutely convinced that we needed more boots on the ground. These people warned me. They said, 'Look, if you don't have more soldiers here, you're going to lose control of this situation and you're going to face an insurgency some months from now.' I begged and pleaded that we send more troops. Secretary Rumsfeld said, 'Well, our commanders on the ground haven't asked for them.' It's not up to the commanders on the ground. It's up to the leadership of the country to make these decisions. That's why we elect them and have civilian supremacy. We're now facing a terrible insurgency. We can prevail, but we've got to have more people over there to get the job done." (Fox News' "Hannity & Colmes," 4/14/04)

· April 2004: "Third, it is painfully clear that we need more troops. Before the war, the U.S. Army chief of staff said that several hundred thousand troops would be necessary to keep the peace. While criticized at the time, General [Eric K.] Shinseki now looks prescient. I have said since my visit to Iraq last August that our military presence is insufficient to bring stability to the country. We should increase the number of forces, including Marines and Special Forces, to conduct offensive operations. There is also a dire need for other types of forces, including linguists, intelligence officers, and civil affairs officers. We must deploy at least another full division, and probably more." (John McCain, Remarks To Council On Foreign Relations, Washington, DC, 4/22/04)

May 2004: "We need more troops in, need more troops now. Yes, there are more troops that are going to stay there, but we may even need more than that, and we have to expand the size of the military. We really do." (Fox News' "The Big Story With John Gibson," 5/10/04)

June 2004: "Some of this could have been prevented if Secretary Rumsfeld had recognized long ago what so many of us were saying urgently, that we needed more troops on the ground in Iraq, particularly of particular specifications, specialties that these people have that are being called up involuntarily." (MSNBC's "Hardball," 6/29/04)

August 2004: "I think the events on the ground right now indicate clearly that we cannot bring anybody home. In certain areas we may even have to strengthen our troop presence." (ABC's "Good Morning America," 8/11/04)

September 2004: "I think that we need more troops in Iraq. I've thought that for a long time, election or no election. ... [I]'ve been asking since a year ago last August. So I'm not sure that the elections have a lot to do with it, but I've been saying since a year ago August that we needed more boots on the ground, particularly in the form of Special Forces, civil affairs, linguists and others." (CNBC's "Capital Report," 9/23/04)

November 2004: "It's very tough and we still need more troops. We still need more people there. I believe those reports of those young Marines that said, 'Look, unless we keep a significant presence here, they're going to filter back in.'" (NBC's "Meet The Press," 11/21/04)

December 2004: "[T]he problem that we have here is that the Pentagon has been reacting to initiatives of the enemy rather than taking initiatives from which the enemy has to react to. Many of us, as long as a year and a half ago, said, 'You have to have more people there. You have to have more linguists. You have to have more special forces. You have to have' -- and the Pentagon has reluctantly, obviously, gradually made some increases. And the problem, when you react, you have to extend people on duty there, which is terrible for morale. There's a terrific strain on Guard and reservists. If you plan ahead, then you don't have to do some of these things. The military is too small. The good news is we went into Fallujah and we dug then out of there. And I'm proud of the work. These men and women are magnificent. Their leadership is magnificent. The bad news is we allowed Fallujah to become a sanctuary to start with. So, yes, we need more troops. Yes, we have to win." (Fox News' "Fox News Sunday," 12/5/04)

December 2004: "I have strenuously argued for larger troop numbers in Iraq, including the right kind of troops -- linguists, special forces, civil affairs, etc. ... There are very strong differences of opinion between myself and Secretary Rumsfeld on that issue." (Beth DeFalco, "McCain Says He Has 'No Confidence' In Secretary Of Defense," The Associated Press, 12/13/04)

June 2005: "I think we need -- I think we need more troops there ... because we're not staying once we attack and clear. We've got stay and expand." (MSNBC's "Hardball," 6/28/05)

· June 2005: "I've thought for a long, long time, since the very beginning, that we needed more troops, and one of the reasons why we've experienced many of the difficulties we have is we didn't have enough boots on the ground, and we still do." (CNN's "American Morning," 6/29/05)

August 2005: "We not only don't need to withdraw, we need more troops there." (Fox News' "Fox News Sunday," 8/14/05)

· August 2005: TIME's MIKE DUFFY: "Do you think we need more troops?" SEN. MCCAIN: "I've always said that ... I think we need more and I think they need to stay longer. The problem is, is that we didn't expand the size of the Army and the Marine Corps and we put enormous strains on the Guard and Reserves and on active duty personnel. We need to expand the Army and expand the Marine Corps, and have more troops over there for as long as is necessary. The irony here is that we could have had less troops here now if we had had more troops when they were needed where, in the view of literally every military person I talked to in Iraq, right after the victory." (CBS' "Face The Nation," 8/28/05)

September 2005: "I have always said we need more troops. I believed it then. I believe it now." (NPR's "Morning Edition," 9/20/05)

November 2005: "Securing ever-increasing parts of Iraq and preventing the emergence of new terrorist safe havens will require more troops and money. It will take time, probably years, and mean more American casualties. Those are terrible prices to pay. But with the stakes so high, I believe we must choose the strategy with the best chance of success." (John McCain, Remarks To American Enterprise Institute, Washington, DC, 11/10/05)

· November 2005: "To enhance our chances of success with this strategy and enable our forces to hold as much territory as possible, we need more troops. For this reason, I believe that current ideas to effect a partial drawdown during 2006 are exactly wrong. ... Instead of drawing down, we should be ramping up, with more civil-military soldiers, translators and counterinsurgency operations teams." (John McCain, Remarks To American Enterprise Institute, Washington, DC, 11/10/05)

December 2005: "I've wanted to send troops. I still think we should have more troops there." (NBC's "Meet The Press," 12/4/05)

March 2006: "Of course, I would, quote, like to see more troops." (CNN's "The Situation Room," 3/30/06)

April 2006: "It's well known, because I was asked a direct question about my confidence in Secretary Rumsfeld, that I do not have confidence. But that does not mean that I'm calling for his removal, because that's what the president of the United States' job is." (CNN's "Anderson Cooper 360 Degrees," 4/13/06)

June 2006: "You know, I've always said that we needed more troops over there. I have said that for years." (CBS' "Evening News," 6/20/06)

July 2006: CNN's JOHN KING: "The United States is sending more troops to Iraq. What do you think?" SEN. MCCAIN: "I think it's necessary. I think it was necessary a long, long time ago. I think one of the biggest mistakes we made that we've paid a very heavy price for was not having enough boots on the ground. I said that three years ago." (CNN's "Larry King Live," 7/26/06)

August 2006: NBC's DAVID GREGORY: "But to do that, do you need more U.S. soldiers on the ground now?" SEN. MCCAIN: "I think so. I think so. We took troops from places like Ramadi, which are still not under control, to put them into Baghdad. We've had to send in additional troops as they are. All along, we have not had enough troops on the ground to control the situation. Many, many people knew that and it's -- we're paying a very heavy price for it. But I want to emphasize that we cannot lose this. It will cause chaos in Iraq and in the region, and it's -- I still believe that we, we must prevail." (NBC's "Meet The Press," 8/20/06)

· August 2006: "I know that military commanders on the ground need more troops, whether they're asking for them or not. But see, this is kind of a false argument. ... It's not up to the commanders on the ground, it's up to the leaders who assess the entire battlefield situation to decide whether they need. I've known very few -- General McCaffrey's going to follow us -- I've known very few commanders in the field who see I -- say, 'I need help.'" (NBC's "Meet The Press," 8/20/06)

September 2006: "I still think we need more troops over there." (CBS' "Face The Nation," 9/24/06)

October 2006: "I would increase the size of the Army and Marine Corps by some hundred thousand people, and I would send more troops over there where necessary and I would listen very carefully to my military commanders." (CBS' "Evening News," 10/19/06)

November 2006: "I believe that there are a lot of things that we can do to salvage this, but they all require the presence of additional troops. ... I also said three years ago, if we don't have more troops over there, and we don't do what's necessary, we are going to be doomed to failure. I gave a speech to the Foreign Relations -- Council on Foreign Relations -- that said basically that, and I've been saying it all along in every hearing, and I've been saying, 'You are going to face this situation we're facing today if we didn't have a more robust presence and a better strategy,' and that's -- I proved to be right in that respect." (NBC's "Meet The Press," 11/12/06)

December 2006: "We must have more troops over there. That has to be accompanied by a larger Marine Corps or Army. ... And we have to have a big enough surge that we can get Baghdad under control and then Anbar province under control." (Fox News' "Special Report With Brit Hume," 12/12/06)

January 2007: "The presence of additional coalition forces would give the Iraqi government the ability to do what it cannot accomplish today on its own: impose its rule throughout the country. In bringing security to Iraq, and chiefly to Baghdad, our forces would give the government a fighting chance to pursue reconciliation. ... There are two keys to any surge of U.S. troops. To be of value the surge must be substantial and it must be sustained -- it must be substantial and it must be sustained. We will need a large number of troops. During our recent trip commanders on the ground spoke of a surge of three to five additional brigades in Baghdad and at least an additional brigade in Anbar province. I believe these numbers are the minimum that's required -- a minimum. We need more of the right kind of troops: civil affairs teams, special forces, translators, troops to conduct information operations, among others. The mission of these reinforcements would be to implement the thus-elusive hold element of the military's clear, hold, build strategy, to maintain security in cleared areas to protect the population and critical infrastructure, and to impose the government's authority: essential elements of a traditional counterinsurgency strategy." (John McCain, Remarks To American Enterprise Institute, Washington, DC, 1/5/07)

The New Strategy Is Winning On The Ground In Iraq

Chicago Tribune: "One year ago, fresh American troops were dispatched as part of the 'surge' into Baghdad to tamp down violence and allow political reconciliation. It has been a remarkable year, with violence plummeting and streams of emigres returning to Baghdad. And on Wednesday, Iraq's political leaders finally held up their end of the bargain. The Iraqi parliament did three things. It approved a budget, to start moving on crucial reconciliation projects. It passed a new law to define the scope of provincial powers, critical to power sharing. And it promoted reconciliation by granting a general amnesty for thousands of Iraqi prisoners. That's huge progress. ... Progress, political and military, is fragile but real." (Editorial, "Iraq's Breakthrough," Chicago Tribune, 2/15/08)

The Washington Post: "The evidence is now overwhelming that the 'surge' of U.S. military forces in Iraq this year has been, in purely military terms, a remarkable success." (Editorial, "Iraq's Narrow Window," The Washington Post, 11/18/07)

ABC News: "American troops are spending their fifth Thanksgiving at war in Iraq. Last year on this day, Baghdad was in lockdown after one of that city's deadliest suicide bombings. But the headlines in recent weeks have been different. And today, our Baghdad correspondent, Terry McCarthy, got an extraordinary look at the country, traveling with the number two US general there, Ray Odierno. ... The message we get from US commanders in bases outside Baghdad is pretty much the same wherever we go, cautious optimism. Not only is there a huge increase in Iraqi citizens groups who are coming forward to help the Americans, but overall levels of violence have gone way down. When the surge started, three or four Americans were being killed every day in Iraq. Now that number's gone down to about one a day. And for Iraqis, reasons to be thankful, as well. Civilian deaths in Baghdad are down 65% compared to six months ago. Car bombs are down 47%." (ABC World News, 11/22/07)

The New York Times: "The security improvements in most neighborhoods are real. Days now pass without a car bomb, after a high of 44 in the city in February. The number of bodies appearing on Baghdad's streets has plummeted to about 5 a day, from as many as 35 eight months ago, and suicide bombings across Iraq fell to 16 in October, half the number of last summer and down sharply from a recent peak of 59 in March, the American military says. As a result, for the first time in nearly two years, people are moving with freedom around much of this city. In more than 50 interviews across Baghdad, it became clear that while there were still no-go zones, more Iraqis now drive between Sunni and Shiite areas for work, shopping or school, a few even after dark." (Damien Cave and Alissa J. Rubin, "Baghdad's Weary Start To Exhale As Security Improves," The New York Times, 11/20/07)

_____________________________________________________________________________________
FROM NADAR'S CAMP

Five years ago today.

The United States launched

A criminal invasion of Iraq.

Five years later

More than a million Iraqis dead.

Almost 4,000 Americans dead.

Hundreds of thousands seriously injured.

Millions uprooted.

End the war.The destruction of a country.

The undermining of the rule of law.

What to do?

On this fifth anniversary?

Join with the Nader/Gonzalez peace train.

The peace train that will

Set a six month deadline.

To bring our troops home from Iraq.

To give the Iraqis back their county.

To give the Iraqis back their oil.

Get out.

And when we announce that we are getting out

In six months certain

That will knock the bottom out of the insurgency.

And bring together the three groups - Shia, Sunni, and Kurds

For a unified Iraq.

They will have to come together.

Because the alternative is total bloodshed.

But first, we must get out.

We must set a date certain of six months.

Nader/Gonzalez would set such a date certain.

Clinton/Obama/McCain would not.

Nader/Gonzalez would get U.S. oil companies out of Iraq.

Clinton/Obama/McCain would not.

Nader/Gonzalez would get all U.S. bases out of Iraq.

Clinton/Obama/McCain would not.

Nader/Gonzalez would cut the bloated, wasteful, military budget.

Clinton/Obama/McCain would not.

Clinton/Obama/McCain.

Nader/Gonzalez.

Like night and day.

War and peace.

How best to make amends?

On this fifth anniversary?

Work for peace.

Join now with the Nader/Gonzalez peace train.

Give now to get Nader/Gonzalez on the ballot

In states all across the country.

CLICK TO CONTRIBUTE.Right now, we are in the middle of ballot drive.

To take the peace train to Arizona.

To put Nader/Gonzalez on the ballot

In the Grand Canyon State.

Over the past few days, we have raised

Over $20,000 from 273 donations.

That takes us 40 percent of the way toward our goal - $50,000.

To get Nader/Gonzalez on the ballot in Arizona.

Where the two corporate parties require us to get 40,000 signatures.

But with your help, we will do it.

We will give the good citizens of Arizona -

Home state to the candidate of perpetual war -

John McCain -

A chance to vote for the peace candidates.

Nader/Gonzalez.

Right now, we need only 300 of you

To give $100 each.

And we will send our petition gatherers to Arizona.

To honor those who have died in this needless war -

Work for peace.

Join with Ralph Nader.

And Matt Gonzalez.

Who from the beginning.

Have opposed this war.

And worked with peace groups around the world to end it.

Help put Nader/Gonzalez on the ballot.

And join our peace train.

Onward.

The Nader Team