Pandering? What if Vietnam had considered McCain's release as "pandering"? Either these people are guilty of something or not. Protectionism is nice but at what cost? If there is an imminent threat posed by these people then they must be guilty of a crime, if not then they must go free. We are the "good guys" after all. All we are accomplishing is breaking our own laws and feeding Islamic paranoid misconceptions of western intentions.

No one has the stomach to be Regan and lacking that ultimate candidate I think the Republicans need to come back to the center, and yes, repair how the world views the United States.

There is no need of a publicized irresponsible pull-out of troops and I think McCain knows this. The single biggest issue in this election for me is to ensure we will not cut and run from Iraq leaving it to the militants (like we did in Afghanistan). McCain was on record with the proper approach to the war back when Rumsfeld thought we could conquer all of Iraq with pictures of chocolate cake and three guys in a unarmored hummer. The other things McCain says and does are not important to me, the fact that he knew and knows how to win this war puts him ahead of the pack.

(It is a waste of life to not fight a war to win.)

McCain evidently takes campaign advise from a guy (John Weaver) who mostly works for Democrats so its no wonder the candidate is popular among reporters and shunned by many actual Republicans. Are there really many successful Republicans holding office in the last eight years who have had as their chief campaign advisor someone who hates Karl Rove and whose other clients are all Democrats. I should know enough to stay away from the business of predicting the future (but I obviously don’t) so let me just suggest McCain will never get the nomination which means all this discussion about whether any of us will have to hold our nose and vote for him, is probably moot.

Separately, and admittedly off topic, I don’t understand your quarrel with Dobson. I like Fred Thompson but if he won’t even say whether he’s a Christian or speak at all about his faith then why is it wrong for Dobson to say he’s uncertain whether the man is a Christian. Dobson is in the business of speaking to Christians so why shouldn’t a candidate’s faith be an issue. I happen to be unimpressed with Newt Gingrich so I’m not going to follow Dobson’s advise, but he’s entitled to an opinion and I don’t understand what the problem is here.

I don't have a problem with his right to an opinion as much as the implied religious test - that we have to have someone who is a 'good Christian' in the office of president.