-
Here's an idea! Let's look at McCain's flip-flops
There's so much noise being made about the opposing candidate's changing positions that the noisemakers fail to realize that candidate McCain long ago cornered the market on changing positions.
Read all about it:
Crooks and Liars » McCain Sets a New Record: 10 Flip-Flops in Two Weeks
The link connects to the sources themselves. The vast majority of McCain's flip-flopping has been documented on You Tube, interestingly enough.
McCain sets a new flip-flop record: 10 flip-flops in two weeks
In his eternal quest for the Republican presidential nomination, the supposed maverick John McCain has repeatedly reversed long-held positions and compromised purportedly core principles. From the Bush tax cuts, the religious right and immigration reform to overturning Roe v. Wade, proclaiming Samuel Alito a model Supreme Court Justice and bashing France (just to name a few), McCain changed sides as changing political conditions dictated.
But over the past two weeks, McCain??s rapid fire, acrobatic flip-flops have produced whiplash, at least for voters. 10 times since the beginning of June, McCain has retreated from, upended or just forgotten positions he once claimed as his own. On Social Security, balancing the budget, defense spending, domestic surveillance and a host of other issues so far this month, McCain??s ??Straight Talk Express? did a U-turn on the road to the White House.
1. Social Security Privatization. John McCain has apparently learned the lesson that the more President Bush spoke about his Social Security privatization scheme, the less popular it became. On Friday, Mr. Straight Talk proclaimed at a New Hampshire event, ??I??m not for, quote, privatizing Social Security. I never have been. I never will be.? Sadly, McCain and his advisers like ousted HP CEO Carly Fiorina are on record declaring fidelity to the idea of diverting Social Security dollars into private accounts. On November 18, 2004, for example, McCain announced, ??Without privatization, I don??t see how you can possibly, over time, make sure that young Americans are able to receive Social Security benefits.? And in March 2003, McCain backed his President, declaring, ??As part of Social Security reform, I believe that private savings accounts are a part of it - along the lines that President Bush proposed.? As they say, let??s go to the videotape.
2. Raising - and Slashing - Defense Spending. As Steve Benen noted Friday, John McCain was also for boosting American defense spending before he was against it. In the November 2007 issue of Foreign Affairs, McCain argued ??we can also afford to spend more on national defense, which currently consumes less than four cents of every dollar that our economy generates - far less than what we spent during the Cold War.? But facing the $2 trillion budgetary hole the McCain tax plan is forecast to produce (a sea of red ink even the Wall Street Journal noticed), Team McCain changed its tune. As Forbes scoffed in amazement:
??McCain??s top economic adviser, Doug Holtz-Eakin, blithely supposes that cuts in defense spending could make up for reducing the corporate tax rate from 35% to 25% and the subsequent shrinkage in federal revenues. Get that? The national security candidate wants to cut spending on our national security. Wait until the generals and the admirals hear that.?
3. First Term Balanced Budget Pledge. With its on-again/off-again/on-again promise to balance the budget by January 2013, the McCain campaign executed that rarest of political maneuvers, the 360. During a February 15th rally in La Crosse, Wisconsin, ??McCain promised he??d offer a balanced budget by the end of his first term.? But just days later, McCain??s senior economic adviser Douglas Holtz-Eakin announced a deficit-ending target of 2017. In mid-April, Holtz-Eakin proclaimed, ??I would like the next president not to talk about deficit reduction.? McCain, too, signaled the retreat from his first-term balance budget commitment, explaining to Chris Matthews on April 15th that ??economic conditions are reversed.?
Apparently economic conditions have improved dramatically since then. On June 6, Holtz-Eakin squared the circle, announcing, ??That plan, when appropriately phased in, as it has always been intended to be, will bring the budget to balance by the end of his first term.?
4. The Media??s Treatment of Hillary Clinton. No doubt, John McCain suffers from recurring bouts of selective amnesia. And some episodes take only days to manifest themselves. During his disastrous ??green screen? speech on June 3, McCain reached out to Hillary Clinton??s supporters by proclaiming, ??The media often overlooked how compassionately she spoke to the concerns and dreams of millions of Americans, and she deserves a lot more appreciation than she sometimes received.? But by June 7, McCain denied to Newsweek that his media critique never passed his lips, ??I did not??that was in prepared remarks, and I did not??I??m not in the business of commenting on the press and their coverage or not coverage.?
5. The Estate Tax. Just days before his contortionist act on Social Security, John McCain reversed course on the estate tax as well. On June 8, 2006, McCain on the Senate floor expressed his agreement with Teddy Roosevelt that ??most great civilized countries have an income tax and an inheritance tax? and ??in my judgment both should be part of our system of federal taxation.? But after years of battling Republican colleagues dead-set on dismantling the so-called ??death tax? and instead promoting a $5 million trigger, on Tuesday John McCain sounded the retreat. Now, he insists, ??the estate tax is one of the most unfair tax laws on the books.?
6. FISA, Domestic Surveillance and Telecom Immunity. When it comes to the Bush administration??s program of domestic spying on Americans, McCain has performed similar logical gymnastics. On December 20, 2007, McCain suggested to the Pulitzer prize-winning journalist Charles Savage that President Bush had clearly crossed the line. As Wired??s Ryan Singel noted:
??I think that presidents have the obligation to obey and enforce laws that are passed by Congress and signed into law by the president, no matter what the situation is,? McCain said. The Globe??s Charlie Savage pushed further, asking , ??So is that a no, in other words, federal statute trumps inherent power in that case, warrantless surveillance?? To which McCain answered, ??I don??t think the president has the right to disobey any law.?
But on June 2, McCain adviser Holtz-Eakin put that notion to rest, telling the National Review:
??[N]either the Administration nor the telecoms need apologize for actions that most people, except for the ACLU and the trial lawyers, understand were Constitutional and appropriate in the wake of the attacks on September 11, 2001.?
Pressed to explain the glaring inconsistencies, John McCain on June 6 played dumb, deciding that cowardice is the better part of valor. As the New York Times reported, McCain now believes the legality of Bush??s regime of NSA domestic surveillance is unclear and, in any event, is old news:
??It??s ambiguous as to whether the president acted within his authority or not,? he said, saying courts had ruled different ways on the matter. ??I??m not interested in going back. I??m interested in addressing the challenge we face to day of trying to do everything we can to counter organizations and individuals that want to destroy this country. So there??s ambiguity about it. Let??s move forward.?
As for immunity for the telecommunications firms cooperating with the White House in what before August 2007 was doubtless illegal surveillance, there too McCain??s position has evolved. On May 23, campaign surrogate Chuck Fish announced that McCain would not back retroactive immunity ??unless there were revealing Congressional hearings and heartfelt repentance from those telephone and Internet companies.? Subsequently, the McCain campaign swiftly backtracked, claiming its man supports immunity unconditionally.
7. Restoring the Everglades. On June 5, John McCain traveled to the Everglades to win over Floridians and environmentally-minded voters. There he proclaimed, ??I am in favor of doing whatever??s necessary to save the Everglades.? Sadly, as ThinkProgress documented, McCain not only opposed $2 billion in funding for the restoration of the Everglades national park, he backed President Bush??s veto of the legislation in 2007. ??I believe,? he said, ??that we should be passing a bill that will authorize legitimate, needed projects without sacrificing fiscal responsibility.?
8. Divestment from South Africa. During his June 2 speech to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), John McCain called for the international community to target Iran for the kind of worldwide sanctions regime applied to apartheid-era South Africa. Unfortunately, McCain??s lobbyist-advisers Charlie Black and Rick Davis each represented firms doing business with Tehran. Even more unfortunate, John McCain was frequently not among those offering ??moral clarity and conviction? in backing ??a divestment campaign against South Africa, helping to rid that nation of the evil of apartheid.? As ThinkProgress detailed:
Despite voting to override President Reagan??s veto of a bill imposing economic sanctions against South Africa in 1986, McCain voted against sanctions on at least six other occasions.
9. Fighting Job Losses in Michigan. During the run-up to the Michigan primary, John McCain cautioned workers there in January that he didn??t want to raise ??false hopes that somehow we can bring back lost jobs,? adding that it? wasn??t government??s job to protect buggy factories and haberdashers when cars replaced carriages and men stopped wearing hats.? But after getting trounced in Michigan by Mitt Romney and watching the economy deteriorate further, McCain has had a change of heart. As Bloomberg noted on June 5:
Nowadays, the party??s presumptive nominee is singing a different tune, striking a populist pose and saying ??new jobs are coming?? ?Over the past few months, however, McCain has taken a lesson from Romney, acknowledging recently that ??Americans are hurting.? Returning to Michigan last month, the Arizona senator told a local television station that he would fight for new jobs and the state wouldn??t ??be left behind.?
Perhaps the good people of Michigan, as John McCain suggested to a Kentucky audience in April, can make a living on eBay.
10. Opposing Hurricane Katrina Investigations. During a June 4th town hall meeting in Baton Rouge, John McCain answered a reporter??s question regarding Hurricane Katrina and the failure of the New Orleans levees by announcing:
??I??ve supported every investigation and ways of finding out what caused the tragedy. I??ve been here to New Orleans. I??ve met with people on the ground.?
As it turns out, not so much. McCain??s revisionist history neglects to mention that in 2005 and 2006 he twice voted against a commission to study the government??s response to Katrina. He also opposed three separate emergency funding measures providing relief to Katrina victims, including the extension of five months of Medicaid benefits. And as ThinkProgress pointed out, ??until traveling there one month ago, McCain had made just one public tour of New Orleans since Hurricane Katrina touched down in August 2005.?
And so it goes. As surely as the sun rises in the east and sets in the west each day, so too will John McCain change positions. (Like that other law of nature, McCain??s flip-flops are literally becoming a daily occurrence. Since this piece was originally drafted on Saturday, McCain added two new policy turnabouts - on phasing out rather than repealing the Alternative Minimum Tax and on requiring a litmus test for his judicial appointees - to his litany of reversals.) As the Pew Research Center recently found, the word Americans now most frequently use to describe John McCain is not ??maverick,? but ??old.? Given the dizzying pace of his reversals, ??opportunist? may soon top that list.
-
Here's an idea! Let's look at McCain's flip-flops
McCain Flip Flop is nothing new...
Fear this man
[GVIDEO]http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5427374227663840448&q=McCain+Flip+ Flop+Video&ei=KHqWSIXtKJSUrgLkgO3HBQ[/GVIDEO]
-
Here's an idea! Let's look at McCain's flip-flops
he's just the kind of asshole america should elect to continue driving us off of the cliff
-
Here's an idea! Let's look at McCain's flip-flops
You forgot these, honey. Some of them are older, but they're also some of McCain's more significant ones.
http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/9111.html
McCain??s flourishing flip-flop list
Just to follow-up briefly on Michael??s guest-post from yesterday, Sen. John McCain??s (R-Ariz.) new-found opposition to Roe v. Wade is rather remarkable, even for him.
In 1999, McCain was in New Hampshire, campaigning for the GOP nomination as a moderate. He proclaimed himself a pro-life candidate, but told reporters that ??in the short term, or even the long term, I would not support repeal of Roe v. Wade.? He explained that overturning Roe would force ??women in America to [undergo] illegal and dangerous operations.? Yesterday, campaigning for the GOP nomination as a conservative, McCain said the opposite.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Let me ask one question about abortion. Then I want to turn to Iraq. You??re for a constitutional amendment banning abortion, with some exceptions for life and rape and incest.
MCCAIN: Rape, incest and the life of the mother. Yes.
STEPHANOPOULOS: So is President Bush, yet that hasn??t advanced in the six years he??s been in office. What are you going to do to advance a constitutional amendment that President Bush hasn??t done?
MCCAIN: I don??t think a constitutional amendment is probably going to take place, but I do believe that it??s very likely or possible that the Supreme Court should ?? could overturn Roe v. Wade, which would then return these decisions to the states, which I support?. Just as I believe that the issue of gay marriage should be decided by the states, so do I believe that we would be better off by having Roe v. Wade return to the states.
The old McCain didn??t want an amendment and didn??t want Roe overturned. The new McCain completely disagrees with the old McCain.
It??s worth noting that politicians?? opinions on abortion can, and often do, ??evolve? over time. Dick Gephardt and Al Gore, for example, both opposed abortion rights before eventually becoming pro-choice. With this in mind, McCain??s unexpected shift may simply reflect yet another pol whose thinking has changed over time.
Or, far more likely, McCain is once again abandoning any pretense of consistency and integrity, and is now willing to say literally anything to win.
Let??s return, once again, to McCain??s flourishing flip-flop list, which is now a Top 11 list.
* McCain criticized TV preacher Jerry Falwell as ??an agent of intolerance? in 2002, but has since decided to cozy up to the man who said Americans ??deserved? the 9/11 attacks. (Indeed, McCain has now hired Falwell??s debate coach.)
* McCain used to oppose Bush??s tax cuts for the very wealthy, but he reversed course in February.
* In 2000, McCain accused Texas businessmen Sam and Charles Wyly of being corrupt, spending ??dirty money? to help finance Bush??s presidential campaign. McCain not only filed a complaint against the Wylys for allegedly violating campaign finance law, he also lashed out at them publicly. In April, McCain reached out to the Wylys for support.
* McCain supported a major campaign-finance reform measure that bore his name. In June, he abandoned his own legislation.
* McCain used to think that Grover Norquist was a crook and a corrupt shill for dictators. Then McCain got serious about running for president and began to reconcile with Norquist.
* McCain took a firm line in opposition to torture, and then caved to White House demands.
* McCain gave up on his signature policy issue, campaign-finance reform, and won??t back the same provision he sponsored just a couple of years ago.
* McCain was against presidential candidates campaigning at Bob Jones University before he was for it.
* McCain was anti-ethanol. Now he??s pro-ethanol.
* McCain was both for and against state promotion of the Confederate flag.
* And now he??s both for and against overturning Roe v. Wade.
It??s not exactly a newsflash that McCain is veering ridiculously to the right in a rather shameless attempt to reinvent himself, but Dems should take advantage of the situation and help establish the narrative now. Despite his rather embarrassing record of late, we still have major media figures telling the public that ??no one would accuse McCain of equivocating on anything.?
Now is the time to begin characterizing McCain ?? accurately ?? as a man with no principle beliefs. Dems should not only criticize McCain??s constantly evolving opinions on nearly everything, they should openly mock him for it now, so that the storyline becomes second nature (like the GOP did with ??serial exaggerator? Al Gore).
The nation is seeing McCain 2.0, and we like the old one better.
-
Here's an idea! Let's look at McCain's flip-flops
Is this when I spam the boards about those, "Repubs McCainites, where you at to defend mr.mccain", then later say they endorse neither candidate.
-
Here's an idea! Let's look at McCain's flip-flops
Quote:
Originally Posted by birdgirl73
There's so much noise being made about the opposing candidate's changing positions that the noisemakers fail to realize that candidate McCain long ago cornered the market on changing positions.
Noisemakers? Wow, that's harsh.:rolleyes:
I see we have some fine bi-partisan sources such as "Crooks and Liars", "Keith Oberman", and the "Carpetbaggerreport". I try to stay away from these types myself.....Sean Hannity would be a good example of this from the right but hey, to each his own. Considering all this good information though it's suprising that McCain is tied with Obama in the Gallop polls.
We all know what were getting with McCain. A moderate conservative asshole politician that is an american hero, has cut deals for 30 years in Senate behind closed doors, has a mind for military operations as proven with the surge, hasn't taken earmarks, is best suited to deal with the likes of Iran and Venezuela to name a few, and our best chance of drilling the hell out of this country for oil.
As for myself....I'll vote for the asshole before the piece of shit. The lesser of two evils once again. Hey, what is it Obama is actually for again????
Have a good one!:s4:
-
Here's an idea! Let's look at McCain's flip-flops
P4B why dont you truly tell us what you think lol......
-
Here's an idea! Let's look at McCain's flip-flops
Quote:
Originally Posted by fishman3811
P4B why dont you truly tell us what you think lol......
I know I'm a bit timid fishman......have to learn how to express myself more on here I guess.:D
Have a good one!:s4:
-
Here's an idea! Let's look at McCain's flip-flops
P4B well i know what you mean all politicians are only out for themselves and that will never change.
-
Here's an idea! Let's look at McCain's flip-flops
Obama is just as bad...
[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BckykC3NrHw[/YOUTUBE]
-
Here's an idea! Let's look at McCain's flip-flops
Nice hit piece. Not very well thought out, and as far as propoganda goes...it's weak.
Example:
Your #2 on the list. The defense spending bill was rejected because of tangental earmarks not associated in any way with the defense department. Was he indeed voting for cutting the defense budget? Get fucking real. His family has been 'lifer' military for generations. He was assuring that the defense budget was just that...for defense. No earmarks, no pink parking spaces in front of recruitors offices, no Woodstock Museum...just defense.
Wasn't necessary to read the other crap listed. No sense in reading half lies and out of context comparisons, when the truth is readily available to those with enough brain power to verify that which they don't understand. But parrots are predictable and lazy, which is what authors like this count on.
If you like being told how to think, and don't really care that you are not getting the whole story...keep reading this half-wit's articles. A sure-fire path to ignorance.
There's a new book out called Obama Nation. Lay's out his childhood, his adolescense, his muslim upbringing, his father, connections to terrorists, both foreign and domestic, his voting record, his socialist rantings...
All referenced and footnoted with the facts.
Number one fact: that most of it is in Osama's own words.
-
Here's an idea! Let's look at McCain's flip-flops
P4b Said "As for myself....I'll vote for the asshole before the piece of shit. The lesser of two evils once again. Hey, what is it Obama is actually for again????"
Couldent have said it better myself. Although I truely disagree with your bashing of Ron Paul, since he isint going to be on the ticket my vote will probably be cast for Mccain. OBama is way to much of a pure socialist and I dont want a bunch of new taxes to pay for his stupid government sponsored programs.
-
Here's an idea! Let's look at McCain's flip-flops
I saw a report on Ron Paul the other day and I have to give the man props:
The Platform » Blog Archive » Frank, Paul: “Legalize it”
Little off topic but what the hell....
Have a good one!:s4:
-
Here's an idea! Let's look at McCain's flip-flops
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Byrd
McCain??s flourishing flip-flop list
Just to follow-up briefly on Michael??s guest-post from yesterday, Sen. John McCain??s (R-Ariz.) new-found opposition to Roe v. Wade is rather remarkable, even for him.
In 1999, McCain was in New Hampshire, campaigning for the GOP nomination as a moderate. He proclaimed himself a pro-life candidate, but told reporters that ??in the short term, or even the long term, I would not support repeal of Roe v. Wade.? He explained that overturning Roe would force ??women in America to [undergo] illegal and dangerous operations.? Yesterday, campaigning for the GOP nomination as a conservative, McCain said the opposite.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Let me ask one question about abortion. Then I want to turn to Iraq. You??re for a constitutional amendment banning abortion, with some exceptions for life and rape and incest.
MCCAIN: Rape, incest and the life of the mother. Yes.
STEPHANOPOULOS: So is President Bush, yet that hasn??t advanced in the six years he??s been in office. What are you going to do to advance a constitutional amendment that President Bush hasn??t done?
MCCAIN: I don??t think a constitutional amendment is probably going to take place, but I do believe that it??s very likely or possible that the Supreme Court should ?? could overturn Roe v. Wade, which would then return these decisions to the states, which I support?. Just as I believe that the issue of gay marriage should be decided by the states, so do I believe that we would be better off by having Roe v. Wade return to the states.
The old McCain didn??t want an amendment and didn??t want Roe overturned. The new McCain completely disagrees with the old McCain.
- Yeah. I sure hate a candidate that wants the federal government out of our family planning clinics, and leave the decision up to each individual state. How anti-socialist of him.
...
Let??s return, once again, to McCain??s flourishing flip-flop list, which is now a Top 11 list.
* McCain criticized TV preacher Jerry Falwell as ??an agent of intolerance? in 2002, but has since decided to cozy up to the man who said Americans ??deserved? the 9/11 attacks. (Indeed, McCain has now hired Falwell??s debate coach.)
* McCain used to oppose Bush??s tax cuts for the very wealthy, but he reversed course in February.
- Is there a cut-n-paste site for lazy democrats unable to research facts? This shit never ends.
* In 2000, McCain accused Texas businessmen Sam and Charles Wyly of being corrupt, spending ??dirty money? to help finance Bush??s presidential campaign. McCain not only filed a complaint against the Wylys for allegedly violating campaign finance law, he also lashed out at them publicly. In April, McCain reached out to the Wylys for support.
- Gee...a republican asking for support from another (conviction-free) republican. What a weird concept.
* McCain supported a major campaign-finance reform measure that bore his name. In June, he abandoned his own legislation.
-Does no good to attend the party alone. Obama signed the pledge, then about what, a month later went back on his word? More half-facts from half-wits.
...
* McCain took a firm line in opposition to torture, and then caved to White House demands.
- This is an idiots guide to democratic talking-points, right?. A fable only a moron could believe
* McCain gave up on his signature policy issue, campaign-finance reform, and won??t back the same provision he sponsored just a couple of years ago.
- You're repeating yourself, and it's still an ignorant statement.
*...
* And now he??s both for and against overturning Roe v. Wade.
- ...? Those that get their facts straight, won't look so stupid all of the time.
Now is the time to begin characterizing McCain ?? accurately ?? as a man with no principle beliefs. Dems should not only criticize McCain??s constantly evolving opinions on nearly everything, they should openly mock him for it now, so that the storyline becomes second nature (like the GOP did with ??serial exaggerator? Al Gore.
- Oh yes...Al (carbon credits are cool) Gore? He isn't a serial exaggerator...he's a liar.
The nation is seeing McCain 2.0, and we like the old one better.
Normally I feel obliged to reference my facts, but, this shit is so laughable.
This crap is less thought-out than the OP. Nothing like taking situational license with your out of context blatherings.
By the looks of it, half-truth and inuendo are the best some folks can muster. Likely, it's best to know and understand what the fuck is going on. Comes in handy when you grow up. :thumbsup:
-
Here's an idea! Let's look at McCain's flip-flops
Quote:
Originally Posted by Psycho4Bud
Noisemakers? Wow, that's harsh.:rolleyes:
I see we have some fine bi-partisan sources such as "Crooks and Liars", "Keith Oberman", and the "Carpetbaggerreport". I try to stay away from these types myself.....Sean Hannity would be a good example of this from the right but hey, to each his own. Considering all this good information though it's suprising that McCain is tied with Obama in the Gallop polls.
We all know what were getting with McCain. A moderate conservative asshole politician that is an american hero, has cut deals for 30 years in Senate behind closed doors, has a mind for military operations as proven with the surge, hasn't taken earmarks, is best suited to deal with the likes of Iran and Venezuela to name a few, and our best chance of drilling the hell out of this country for oil.
As for myself....I'll vote for the asshole before the piece of shit. The lesser of two evils once again. Hey, what is it Obama is actually for again????
Have a good one!:s4:
I couldn't agree more, P4B ... face it people, we face a choice between a 'lying, say anything to get elected asshole' and a 'lying, say anything to get elected asshole' ... one will destroy my Social Security and Medicare, the other will destroy America ... once again, I will hold my nose, shoot myself in the foot, and vote for America's survival, instead of my own ... I guess I just ain't the selfish type :smokin:
-
Here's an idea! Let's look at McCain's flip-flops
Gee Gandolf, sorry to have touched a nerve. At least I give my opinion up front, and not hide behind a bad rep note. :thumbsup:
If/when folks are incapable of giving the respect our country deserves by at least having a rudimentary understanding of the issues, or understanding the process that is our electoral system, nor are they capable of giving any respect to honesty and a factual representation of any candidates past or present positions, nor the context to which it truly applies...then I guess I'm, at times, incapable of giving any respect back.
If all you want is bullshit, I'm sorry...I'm not the Times. :jointsmile:
-
Here's an idea! Let's look at McCain's flip-flops
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rusty Trichome
Gee Gandolf, sorry to have touched a nerve. At least I give my opinion up front, and not hide behind a bad rep note. :thumbsup:
Just to let everyone know, we CAN read the rep given to other members and this sort of thing isn't tolorated. The rep system, visitor messages in the profile are ALL under the same guidelines as the forums.
Have a good one!:jointsmile:
-
Here's an idea! Let's look at McCain's flip-flops
Quote:
Originally Posted by GrinKyle
Is this when I spam the boards about those, "Repubs McCainites, where you at to defend mr.mccain", then later say they endorse neither candidate.
Actually it seems a number of people came to defend McCain, but I assure you that just about every person on this forum that opposes Obama doesn't necessarily support McCain.
For instance, I know I will be voting for McCain and while I can't speak for P4B... I am fairly confident he will be voting for McCain. Yet neither one of us necessarily supports him or truely approves of him. We simply agree/align more with what McCain has to say/offer.
The supporters are a perfect Example of someone who is voting for McCain but don't necessarily support that candidate.
-
Here's an idea! Let's look at McCain's flip-flops
Moderating
Folks who complain about bad reps or unkind comments tend to bring more scrutiny upon themselves. Mr. Trichome, you're obviously very angry, very frightened about this election, or both. But you can state your opinion without insults. You'll have to do that if you want to keep your posts visible. Funny how your complaint about a negative rep comment drew attention to your own unnecessary rudeness above.
-
Here's an idea! Let's look at McCain's flip-flops
Quote:
Originally Posted by daihashi
The supporters are a perfect Example of someone who is voting for McCain but don't necessarily support that candidate.
That should've read "The Hillary Clinton supporters....."
-
Here's an idea! Let's look at McCain's flip-flops
Quote:
Originally Posted by birdgirl73
Moderating
Folks who complain about bad reps or unkind comments tend to bring more scrutiny upon themselves. Mr. Trichome, you're obviously very angry, very frightened about this election, or both. But you can state your opinion without insults. You'll have to do that if you want to keep your posts visible. Funny how your complaint about a negative rep comment drew attention to your own unnecessary rudeness above.
It wasn't the bad rep I was pointing out, it was the hiding behind a bad rep note. But I still stand by ny feelings of the content of the post, and as far as fearing the election...my life goes on as it has for many years regardles sof the outcome. Not to mention...the election hasn't been held yet. Likely best not to count ones chickens with fuzzy math.
-
Here's an idea! Let's look at McCain's flip-flops
Get over it RT; I gave your bad rep for outright yelling "your a bunch of idiots!" over and over and over. Everybody with an opinion can claim their opponent doesn't have an understanding of the subject, that's the essence of disagreement. Bad rep is given when called for; but I see your angry self accusing me of "hiding" behind rep as though making my opinion public would be something to fear. :wtf:
Well, there's your public declaration. Enjoy.
-
Here's an idea! Let's look at McCain's flip-flops
:s4:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Psycho4Bud
I know I'm a bit timid fishman......have to learn how to express myself more on here I guess.:D
Have a good one!:s4:
RT ...represents J. McCain very well...two peas in a pod....:s4:
-
Here's an idea! Let's look at McCain's flip-flops
LMAO, bad rep for giving bad rep; I was just waiting for it! :D
I'm sure it'll have a profound affect on both our status. :jointsmile:
-
Here's an idea! Let's look at McCain's flip-flops
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dutch Pimp
:s4:
RT ...represents J. McCain very well...two peas in a pod....:s4:
And very proud of it. I am very comfortable with my conservatism, as liberal democrats and progressives do not represent neither the moral nor the mental characteristics I find attractive.
I'm quite positive I step on toes, but I'm also ready to back-up my statements with fact. If it's my personality you dislike...tough shit. I'm not here so you can like me. I can say tho, there are a few in here I do not see eye-to-eye with, but I can assure you I lose no sleep over it.
Don't like my opinion Gandalf...? That's ok...It's not yours to take or change. If you have a problem with the content of my posts, like I pm'd you, I'm always open for an intelligent debate with any person properly armed for the battle. :jointsmile:
Gandolf: yup.:thumbsup:
-
Here's an idea! Let's look at McCain's flip-flops
WOW....and this is why I stay outta politic arguements, why would any of you guys get worked up about this shit? 99% of their "stances" are complete bullshit that never sees light, just gets em elected...
...news flash... ALL POLITICIANS SUCK!! Think about it. When is the last time our country gave a shit about the president? Kennedy? NONE of these "figures" we put into office will change SHIT.
None of em are gonna make sure social security stays around, none of em are gonna fix health care issues, and for DAMN sure, none are gonna even think about re-scheduling, let alone legalization. As someone who has been incarcerated, shot at, and thrown out of a perfectly good airplane "for our country"...I have lost ALL respect for our government....
Fuck em all.......:cursing:
whiskeytango
-
Here's an idea! Let's look at McCain's flip-flops
Quote:
Originally Posted by SnSstealth
WOW....and this is why I stay outta politic arguements, why would any of you guys get worked up about this shit? 99% of their "stances" are complete bullshit that never sees light, just gets em elected...
...news flash... ALL POLITICIANS SUCK!! Think about it. When is the last time our country gave a shit about the president? Kennedy? NONE of these "figures" we put into office will change SHIT.
None of em are gonna make sure social security stays around, none of em are gonna fix health care issues, and for DAMN sure, none are gonna even think about re-scheduling, let alone legalization. As someone who has been incarcerated, shot at, and thrown out of a perfectly good airplane "for our country"...I have lost ALL respect for our government....
Fuck em all.......:cursing:
whiskeytango
HELL YEAH! Post of the day in my book!!:thumbsup:
Have a good one!:s4:
-
Here's an idea! Let's look at McCain's flip-flops
I'm not sure it is completely fair to say McCain has "flip-flopped" --- he's really only done half of that --- he's flopped. Bigtime flopper, McCain.
Obama is not so much a flip-flopper either --- he tends to flip more than flop. And flipping is much more cooler than flopping. Think of a diving board -- far better to flip than to flop!
All politicians will change their positions over time. The important thing to evaluate is whether a politician changes their position because of changing conditions or political reality, which is reasonable and even wise. Or because of popular opinion or to appeal to a particular constituency, which is craven and cowardly. Try to decide whether you agree with the changed position or not, or whether there is a good reason for the change (such as a bill that has both good points you agree with and bad points that are worth the compromise).
A lot of people say they want a president who can "reach across the aisle" and compromise to get things done. But those are exactly the politicians who are open to the "flip-flop" charge. So don't be too quick to write off a politicain who changes position unless the reasons are craven or self serving.
When I look at this list of 10 flip-flops by McCain, I don't see any that stand out as something I agree with or part of a compromise that I would agree with. Thses look like craven, self-serving flip-flops to me.
Nice flop, McCain.
-
Here's an idea! Let's look at McCain's flip-flops
[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iWX5u69hmzY[/YOUTUBE]
-
Here's an idea! Let's look at McCain's flip-flops
hey hey yall long time. race season here and my work is crazy.
has any one checked out the third party canidate? ive heard good things about the liberatarian canidate. aint had time to check him out though. but now for the point im getting at. why vote for the lesser of two evils as the old saying goes "choosing the lesser of two evils is still choosing evil". so when we go to cast our votes dont vote because one of the two main oartys canadate is less eveil than the other in your opinion. vote for the person whos policys and beliefs are the closest to your own.
we have two main partys in this country that are both worthless in my opinion. neither seem concerned with helping the people of this country. so in my opinion screw both of them and lets get some people in public ofice who are more in align with how the american people think and feal than how their fantasy world that is holywood fed tell them how the the american people think and feel.
im called a liberal because i beleive in equality and preserving our enviroment. im against destruction of forests i beleive in non discrimination. i think my beleifs are in acordense with the majority of the american people. i do support the nra and my right to own a gun, i dont consider hunters the bad guy for killing a deer( if ya been to Ohio latly and see how many deer are there you would see that there needs to be all out slaughter). i beleive affermative action to be dicriminatory, i will never say reverse discrimination because thats like saying reverse equality. but i do not like our curent admin. i think my govt IS lying to me. i beleive we will never know what exactly happened at roswell, kennedy assassination and the world trade center. now who should i vote for? im expected to vote for obama but i cant do that because he dont stand for all the things i stand for. but mccain dont stand for all the things i beleive in.
but most important of all and we all need to ban together for this is decrmillization of the great and sacred herb. last time i seen a census on us pot heads there were an estimated 85 million ADMITTED pot smokers in the US. 85 million people will stand up and say yes i smoke pot. what about all of those that cant or wont admit it? another 20-25 mill? thats 100 million people or 1/3 of the country. we can make a differance.!! but we cant seem to get a canadate who supports us. why? it starts at home folks get out and vote every chance you get. then we will get a canadate who holds the same beleif as the rest of us.
but who am i bullshitin ill provably vote for mccain.
sorry about the rant and the misspellings i blame it on the booze
-
Here's an idea! Let's look at McCain's flip-flops
why is there so much talk about how good/bad mccain and obama are. I am willing to bet my left testie and will stop smoking for ever if there is not a complete dirtbag that wins in NOV. It doesnt matter who wins, until we as Americans stand up and refuse to except the flawed two party system. There is no change without change. I mean come on...... dem took congress and nothing changed.
-
Here's an idea! Let's look at McCain's flip-flops
Quote:
Originally Posted by yokinazu
hey hey yall long time. race season here and my work is crazy.
has any one checked out the third party canidate? ive heard good things about the liberatarian canidate. aint had time to check him out though. but now for the point im getting at. why vote for the lesser of two evils as the old saying goes "choosing the lesser of two evils is still choosing evil". so when we go to cast our votes dont vote because one of the two main oartys canadate is less eveil than the other in your opinion. vote for the person whos policys and beliefs are the closest to your own.
we have two main partys in this country that are both worthless in my opinion. neither seem concerned with helping the people of this country. so in my opinion screw both of them and lets get some people in public ofice who are more in align with how the american people think and feal than how their fantasy world that is holywood fed tell them how the the american people think and feel.
im called a liberal because i beleive in equality and preserving our enviroment. im against destruction of forests i beleive in non discrimination. i think my beleifs are in acordense with the majority of the american people. i do support the nra and my right to own a gun, i dont consider hunters the bad guy for killing a deer( if ya been to Ohio latly and see how many deer are there you would see that there needs to be all out slaughter). i beleive affermative action to be dicriminatory, i will never say reverse discrimination because thats like saying reverse equality. but i do not like our curent admin. i think my govt IS lying to me. i beleive we will never know what exactly happened at roswell, kennedy assassination and the world trade center. now who should i vote for? im expected to vote for obama but i cant do that because he dont stand for all the things i stand for. but mccain dont stand for all the things i beleive in.
but most important of all and we all need to ban together for this is decrmillization of the great and sacred herb. last time i seen a census on us pot heads there were an estimated 85 million ADMITTED pot smokers in the US. 85 million people will stand up and say yes i smoke pot. what about all of those that cant or wont admit it? another 20-25 mill? thats 100 million people or 1/3 of the country. we can make a differance.!! but we cant seem to get a canadate who supports us. why? it starts at home folks get out and vote every chance you get. then we will get a canadate who holds the same beleif as the rest of us.
but who am i bullshitin ill provably vote for mccain.
sorry about the rant and the misspellings i blame it on the booze
JUST FYI on the Libertarian candidate ( I support Ron Paul) His name is Bob Barr, he is another major Flip Flopper. Flip Flopped on MMJ and various other things. A lot of libertarians are upset that he is our nominee. Basically the selection is shit this year IMO, If paul ended up running he would get my vote but tahts not happening, so as I said earlier ill follow p4B's idea, the lesser of 2 evils. Screw socialism.
-
Here's an idea! Let's look at McCain's flip-flops
There is an attempt at a write in campaign for Dr. Paul.
I understand there is not a chance in hell that he will win,
however any publicity helps the cause of freedom.
Perhaps I will reweigh my decision to choose the least of two evils.
-
Here's an idea! Let's look at McCain's flip-flops
This is an idea inspired by Daihashi on a deleted thread. to examine McCain's flip-flops and either prove them right or wrong. I wrote about a flop yesterday on that particular thread was deleted. I decided since I did the research, I should post about it anyway:
Examining:
Quote:
6. FISA, Domestic Surveillance and Telecom Immunity. When it comes to the Bush administration??s program of domestic spying on Americans, McCain has performed similar logical gymnastics. On December 20, 2007, McCain suggested to the Pulitzer prize-winning journalist Charles Savage that President Bush had clearly crossed the line. As Wired??s Ryan Singel noted:
??I think that presidents have the obligation to obey and enforce laws that are passed by Congress and signed into law by the president, no matter what the situation is,? McCain said. The Globe??s Charlie Savage pushed further, asking , ??So is that a no, in other words, federal statute trumps inherent power in that case, warrantless surveillance?? To which McCain answered, ??I don??t think the president has the right to disobey any law.?
But on June 2, McCain adviser Holtz-Eakin put that notion to rest, telling the National Review:
??[N]either the Administration nor the telecoms need apologize for actions that most people, except for the ACLU and the trial lawyers, understand were Constitutional and appropriate in the wake of the attacks on September 11, 2001.?
Pressed to explain the glaring inconsistencies, John McCain on June 6 played dumb, deciding that cowardice is the better part of valor. As the New York Times reported, McCain now believes the legality of Bush??s regime of NSA domestic surveillance is unclear and, in any event, is old news:
??It??s ambiguous as to whether the president acted within his authority or not,? he said, saying courts had ruled different ways on the matter. ??I??m not interested in going back. I??m interested in addressing the challenge we face to day of trying to do everything we can to counter organizations and individuals that want to destroy this country. So there??s ambiguity about it. Let??s move forward.?
As for immunity for the telecommunications firms cooperating with the White House in what before August 2007 was doubtless illegal surveillance, there too McCain??s position has evolved. On May 23, campaign surrogate Chuck Fish announced that McCain would not back retroactive immunity ??unless there were revealing Congressional hearings and heartfelt repentance from those telephone and Internet companies.? Subsequently, the McCain campaign swiftly backtracked, claiming its man supports immunity unconditionally.
I'm here to show that McCain never flopped since he never flipped to begin with. I believe he showed his words in the first quote very carefully and precise. His voting record shows he's consistantly for more surveillence and less independent oversight of governmental agencies.
Of the 37 pieces of legislation on security issues, he had 14 no votes making his position harder to evaluate.
Let's look at a couple of bills that help prove that point:
The link of McCain voting record on national security issues:
Project Vote Smart - Senator John Sidney McCain III - Voting Record
:
Anti-terrorism Wiretaps Amendment (1995) McCain Voted YES
Project Vote Smart - Anti-terrorism Wiretaps Amendment
S AMDT 1215 to S 735: To amend the bill with respect to revisions of existing authority for multipoint wiretaps.
USA Patriot Act of 2001 McCain Voted YES
Project Vote Smart - USA Patriot Act of 2001
HR 3162: To deter and punish terrorist acts in the United States and around the world, to enhance law enforcement investigatory tools, and for other purposes.
Highlights:
Allows law enforcement agencies to share grand jury and other information about suspected terrorists
- Strengthens security on American borders, especially Canada
- Offers rewards to citizens who assist the government in finding terrorists
- Includes measures to break up terrorists' financial networks and money laundering activities via increased communication between law enforcement and financial institutions and more rigorous oversight of financial transactions
Striking Telecommunications Companies' Civil Immunity for Surveillance McCain Voted NO
Project Vote Smart - Senator John McCain on S Amdt 3907 - Striking Telecommunications Companies' Civil Immunity for Surveillance
S Amdt 3907 to S Amdt 3911 to S 2248: To strike the provisions providing immunity from civil liability to electronic communication service providers for certain assistance provided to the Government.
Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 McCain Voted NO
Project Vote Smart - Senator John McCain on HR 2082 - Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008
- Authorizes classified dollar amounts to be appropriated for fiscal year 2008 for intelligence and intelligence-related activities for the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, the Central Intelligence Agency, the Department of Defense, the Defense Intelligence Agency, the National Security Agency, the Department of the Army, the Department of the Navy, the Department of the Air Force, the Coast Guard, the Department of State, the Department of the Treasury, the Department of Energy, the Department of Justice, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Drug Enforcement Administration, the National Reconnaissance Office, the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, and the Department of Homeland Security (Sec. 101).
- Requires $39.00 million to be transferred from the Director of National Intelligence to the Attorney General for the National Drug Intelligence Center (Sec. 104).
- Authorizes $262.50 million for the Central Intelligence Agency Retirement and Disability Fund (Sec. 201).
- Directs the Director of National Intelligence to implement a multi-level security clearance system for persons proficient in foreign languages or with cultural, linguistic, or other subject matter expertise "critical to national security," and to annually report to Congress regarding the foreign language proficiency of the intelligence community (Sec. 303, Sec. 414).
- Requires the Director of National Intelligence to submit a report to Congress no later than March 31, 2008, regarding the use and impact of private contractors in the intelligence community, as well as the accountability mechanisms that govern their performance (Sec. 307).
- Requires the Director of National Intelligence to submit a report to Congress no later than March 31, 2008, outlining plans to increase the recruiting, hiring, and retaining of diverse candidates (Sec. 309).
- Directs the Director of National Intelligence to conduct vulnerability assessments for major systems, which are defined as significant programs of the intelligence community with projected total development and procurement costs exceeding $500.00 million (Sec. 311).
- Directs the Director of National Intelligence to present annual reports to Congress regarding the acquisition of any major systems and to notify Congress within 60 days if development costs for any programs significantly exceed the baseline costs (Sec. 313, Sec. 314).
- Increases the time of potential imprisonment for disclosing the identity of undercover intelligence officers and agents from 10 to 15 years (Sec. 324).
- Requires the Director of National Intelligence to report to Congress within 45 days after the date of the enactment of this bill regarding the detention and interrogation methods used by the intelligence community (Sec. 326).
- Mandates that no person in the custody or within the control of an element of the intelligence community, regardless of that individual's physical location or nationality, shall be "subject to any treatment or technique of interrogation not authorized by the United States Army Field Manual on Human Intelligence Collector Operations" (Sec. 327).
- Requires all members of the Congressional intelligence committees to be fully updated on intelligence regarding the Israeli military action in Syria on September 6, 2007, before more than 30 percent of authorized appropriations may be expended (Sec. 328).
- Requires the Director of National Intelligence to report to Congress regarding the nuclear intentions and capabilities of Iran and North Korea (Sec. 407).
- Establishes an Office of the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community to objectively investigate and audit the conduct of the intelligence community (Sec. 413).
USA PATRIOT and Terrorism Prevention Reauthorization McCain Voted YES
Project Vote Smart - USA PATRIOT and Terrorism Prevention Reauthorization
HR 3199: To extend and modify authorities needed to combat terrorism, and for other purposes.
Highlights:
- Assigns three judges who reside within 20 miles of the District of Columbia to hear individuals' petitions concerning improper requests by the FBI for library circulation records, library patron lists, book sales records, book customer lists, records of fire arm sales, tax return records, educational records and medical records
- Requires the Attorney General to report to the Committees on the Judiciary and the Select Committees on Intelligence in both chambers of Congress every year with the number of library, tax, and various business records orders that are granted, modified, or denied
- Increases the amount of time before a suspect must be notified of a search warrant for his or her property to 30 days after a search, unless the time period is extended by a judge
- Allows Internet service providers to disclose their subscribers information and the contents of their communications to a government entity, if they believe there is �immediate danger of death or serious physical injury�
- Requires that any court that allows a �roving wiretap� under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) must describe in great detail the intended target whose identity is not known
- Allows individuals and businesses to seek legal counsel if they have received a National Security Letter from the FBI requiring them to disclose financial information and records
- Sets the penalty for a lawyer or individual who discloses any information concerning his or her or another individual's National Security Letter of five years in prison, a fine or both
- Clarifies that a convicted terrorist can be subject to the death penalty for air piracy
- Requires the specifics of all transfers of ephedrine, pseudoephedrine or phenylpropanolamine through shipping to a private individual to be reported within a 30 day period
- Increases the punishment for any individual that manufactures or distributes methamphetamine where a child lives or is present
-
Here's an idea! Let's look at McCain's flip-flops
Quote:
Originally Posted by thcbongman
This is an idea inspired by Daihashi on a deleted thread. to examine McCain's flip-flops and either prove them right or wrong. I wrote about a flop yesterday on that particular thread was deleted. I decided since I did the research, I should post about it anyway:
I say this sincerely and unrelated to what you said about me (whether it was meant seriously or sarcastic) but very good post. Useful FACTUAL information that cannot be denied at all.
Regardless of people's stance on the candidates I wish I saw more posts that referenced actual data to prove their point. :thumbsup:
-
Here's an idea! Let's look at McCain's flip-flops
Quote:
Originally Posted by daihashi
I say this sincerely and unrelated to what you said about me (whether it was meant seriously or sarcastic) but very good post. Useful FACTUAL information that cannot be denied at all.
Regardless of people's stance on the candidates I wish I saw more posts that referenced actual data to prove their point. :thumbsup:
Eh, what I said on that post, I flew off the handle, I been a little touchy recently because of an illness in my family. I took that one guys comments the wrong way. I didn't mean to offend anyone or you so I apologize. Sorry man. Thanks!
-
Here's an idea! Let's look at McCain's flip-flops
Quote:
Originally Posted by thcbongman
Eh, what I said on that post, I flew off the handle, I been a little touchy recently because of an illness in my family. I took that one guys comments the wrong way. I didn't mean to offend anyone or you so I apologize. Sorry man. Thanks!
"you must spread some reputation before giving it to thcbongman again"
heh.. I tried :)
I give you and your family my best wishes. I hope everything turns out for the best. :hippy:
