I don't know if RFK would've been elected president had he not been killed. I have no idea how much good MLK could have accomplished if he had not been struck down. Maybe both would've brought great hope and change to our country. MLK did bring much,but we still need him.

I do not know what the loss of those men could do to someone hopeful for the future of our country,but I'm sure it greatly demoralized the left,along with many others. I can't imagine what America would look like today had these men been left alive. Maybe RFK would've won and solidified America as a liberal nation.

What I do know is that the era of the selfish corrupt Republican presidents began in that year. Nixon,Ford,Reagan,Bush,and Bush jr. These men are reasons that democrats are so justifiably upset about the violent remarks that are being stirred up by the words of McCain-Palin.

"Why isn't he farther ahead? Why can't he finish McCain off?"

These statements are what we will be hearing more of from Obama critics and pundits in the next few weeks. Pat Buchanan might as well tattoo any one of these on his forehead to save him some oxygen in thse upcoming weeks.

It's an argument that we heard often in the closing month of the primary by many pundits and opponents of Obama,when they didn't have many other cases to make. The argument essentially concedes that Obama is going to be the winning candidate while setting up a soft cushion to catch the critic or supporter of his opponent when the eventual loss of their candidate occurs. It's a natural response to the realization of a stinging defeat,and we see it in sports all the time. A close loss in anything is demoralizing,so you try to turn it into a positive in order to accept it easier.

First off,let me state I have never served in the armed forces nor have I ever known anyone harmed while serving the country,so take my opinion for what it is worth. However,my feelings on the sacrifices these people make are quite strong. We have heard much from McCain & Co. about how America must do this or that in order to honor our fallen soldiers,and to make sure their sacrifices were not in vain.

 I find this thought process to be way off base. Regardless of the war,policy,or mission,opportunity is created by the sacrifices of soldiers. Now don't get me wrong,just because once in a while war can create a chance that allows life to advance in a positve way,that doesn't mean war is good or that I support it. As we all know more often that not it creates only more war and misery,but often a chance that something good can occur is given to a vilage,a person,or a country.  But what comes of any opportunity and those chances is not what determines the value of the lives of those who died in the line of fire.

  What does determine the value of their sacrifice in my opinion is the act of sacrifice itself. Blood sweat and tears are written about often,but isn't the effort and the willingness to do something that demands sacrifice enough to earn these people the right to be honored in death and not to be treated as employees who failed to meet their daily goals?