|
4 members (theophan, 3 invisible),
118
guests, and
19
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums26
Topics35,219
Posts415,299
Members5,881
| |
Most Online3,380 Dec 29th, 2019
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,658 Likes: 3
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,658 Likes: 3 |
LOL! Not saying I agree - but that's the perception. As to Obama v. Bush - Texas is one of the few states which has the weakest governor [ texaspolitics.laits.utexas.edu]. I'd say Senator Obama has just about as much real-world experience in leadership as W.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,214
Member
|
Member
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,214 |
Ah, it is a perception many have. It's also a perception that's easy to feed.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 528
Member
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 528 |
[Biased Opinion]: The non-conservative tag for McCain came mainly as a result for not falling in line with the RNC on a number of issues.
He talks to Democrats and writes legislation with them. Cooties factor maybe?
He voted against the tax breaks because Bush and the congress at large refused to stop bloating government and deepening national debt.
He voted for campaign finance reform.
He questioned the strategy of our troop deployment and called for a troop increase. The surge eventually came to good results.
He's staunchly anti-abortion, but has voted for a loosening of stem cell regulations. Lamentable.
He prefers a two pronged approach to immigration. As a senator from a state with a huge influx of Mexicans and an existing populace of the same he acknowledges what he sees as a need for firm regulation and securing of the border while at the same time normalizing the status of those already here illegally. Most hard line people (as I am most of the time) living in border states support immediate deportation and hefty fines.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,214
Member
|
Member
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,214 |
He co-authored campaign finance reform, and he is pro-life. For the latter I respect him, but the former had more fluff than substance in my opinion. At the time as well as other times, such as when he was a part of the "gang of 14", there seems to be a hint that he is far too concerned with public opinion polls, the media, and attention in general. I got this impression of him in 2000, it's part of why I dislike him.
Immediate universal deportation is impossible at the moment. We need to control the boarder and deport the illegals who commit felonies such as rape and murder. I work with several illegals whose children were born here. Universal deportation would be hardest on them, they are already spooked at the increasing aggression of ICE. The stories of arrests and deportations cover the front of their printed news/tabloid papers.
I would not vote against McCain if he were nominated, but it would be difficult for me to vote for him during the nomination process.
Terry
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,264
Member
|
OP
Member
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,264 |
For a unique perspective on McCain, where else to turn but to that bastion of conservative irencism, Ann Coulter! Gordo http://www.townhall.com/columnists/...ute_to_truth?page=full&comments=true'Straight Talk' Express Takes Scenic Route To Truth John McCain is Bob Dole minus the charm, conservatism and youth. Like McCain, pollsters assured us that Dole was the most "electable" Republican. Unlike McCain, Dole didn't lie all the time while claiming to engage in Straight Talk.
Of course, I might lie constantly too, if I were seeking the Republican presidential nomination after enthusiastically promoting amnesty for illegal aliens, Social Security credit for illegal aliens, criminal trials for terrorists, stem-cell research on human embryos, crackpot global warming legislation and free speech-crushing campaign-finance laws.
I might lie too, if I had opposed the Bush tax cuts, a marriage amendment to the Constitution, waterboarding terrorists and drilling in Alaska.
And I might lie if I had called the ads of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth "dishonest and dishonorable."
McCain angrily denounces the suggestion that his "comprehensive immigration reform" constituted "amnesty" -- on the ludicrous grounds that it included a small fine. Even the guy who graduated fifth from the bottom of his class at the U.S. Naval Academy didn't fall for this a few years ago.
In 2003, McCain told The Tucson Citizen that "amnesty has to be an important part" of any immigration reform. He also rolled out the old chestnut about America's need for illegals, who do "jobs that American workers simply won't do."
McCain's amnesty bill would have immediately granted millions of newly legalized immigrants Social Security benefits. He even supported allowing work performed as an illegal to count toward Social Security benefits as recently as a vote in 2006 -- now adamantly denied by Mr. Straight Talk.
McCain keeps boasting that he was "the only one" of the Republican presidential candidates who supported the surge in Iraq.
What is he talking about? All Republicans supported the surge -- including Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani. The only ones who didn't support it were McCain pals like Sen. Chuck Hagel. Indeed, the surge is the first part of the war on terrorism that caused McCain to break from Hagel in order to support the president.
True, McCain voted for the war. So did Hillary Clinton. Like her, he then immediately started attacking every other aspect of the war on terrorism. (The only difference was, he threw in frequent references to his experience as a POW, which currently outnumber John Kerry's references to being a Vietnam vet.)
Thus, McCain joined with the Democrats in demanding O.J. trials for terrorists at Guantanamo, including his demand that the terrorists have full access to the intelligence files being used to prosecute them.
These days, McCain gives swashbuckling speeches about the terrorists who "will follow us home." But he still opposes dripping water down their noses. He was a POW, you know. Also a member of the Keating 5 scandal, which you probably don't know, and won't -- until he becomes the Republican nominee.
Though McCain was far from the only Republican to support the surge, he does have the distinction of being the only Republican who voted against the Bush tax cuts. (Also the little lamented Sen. Lincoln Chafee, who later left the Republican Party.) Now McCain claims he opposed the tax cuts because they didn't include enough spending cuts. But that wasn't what he said at the time.
To the contrary, in 2001, McCain said he was voting against Bush's tax cuts based on the idiotic talking point of the Democrats. "I cannot in good conscience," McCain said, "support a tax cut in which so many of the benefits go to the most fortunate among us at the expense of middle-class Americans who need tax relief."
McCain started and fanned the vicious anti-Bush myth that, before the 2000 South Carolina primary, the Bush campaign made phone calls to voters calling McCain a "liar, cheat and a fraud" and accusing him of having an illegitimate black child.
On the thin reed of a hearsay account, McCain immediately blamed the calls on Bush. "I'm calling on my good friend George Bush," McCain said, "to stop this now. He comes from a better family. He knows better than this."
Bush denied that his campaign had anything to do with the alleged calls and, in a stunningly magnanimous act, ordered his campaign to release the script of the calls being made in South Carolina.
Bush asked McCain to do the same for his calls implying that Bush was an anti-Catholic bigot, but McCain refused. Instead, McCain responded with a campaign commercial calling Bush a liar on the order of Bill Clinton:
MCCAIN: His ad twists the truth like Clinton. We're all pretty tired of that.
ANNOUNCER: Do we really want another politician in the White House America can't trust?
After massive investigations by the Los Angeles Times and investigative reporter Byron York, among others, it turned out that neither of the alleged calls had ever been made by the Bush campaign -- nor, it appeared, by anyone else. There was no evidence that any such calls had ever been made, which is unheard of when hundreds of thousands of "robo-calls" are being left on answering machines across the state.
And yet, to this day, the media weep with McCain over Bush's underhanded tactics in the 2000 South Carolina primary.
In fact, the most vicious attack in the 2000 South Carolina primary came from McCain -- and not against his opponent.
Seeking even more favorable press from The New York Times, McCain launched an unprovoked attack against the Rev. Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson, calling them "agents of intolerance." Unlike the phantom "black love child" calls, there's documentary evidence of this smear campaign.
To ensure he would get full media coverage for that little gem, McCain alerted the networks in advance that he planned to attack their favorite whipping boys. Newspaper editors across the country stood in awe of McCain's raw bravery. The New York Times praised him in an editorial that said the Republican Party "has for too long been tied to the cramped ideology of the Falwells and the Robertsons."
Though McCain generally votes pro-life -- as his Arizona constituency requires -- he embraces the loony lingo of the pro-abortion set, repeatedly assuring his pals in the media that he opposes the repeal of Roe v. Wade because it would force women to undergo "illegal and dangerous operations."
Come to think of it, Dole is a million times better than McCain. Why not run him again?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,131
Member
|
Member
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,131 |
I don't weigh in on political matters much - talking theology and things ecclesial is straining enough at times!
But tangetially related is something I have been pondering as the primaries wear on...
How is it the case that certain media darlings rise and fall from grace so very quickly? Is it really a chicken or the egg sort of proposition where the media is informed by public appetite to consume news on certain candidates or vice versa?
Did Giuliani fail to pick up steam because of media attention? or did it wane in the face of lack of electoral interest?
Huckabee was a golden boy in media coverate a few weeks ago. After that, he was curiously unmentioned in much coverage.
The Obama/Clinton division has been an intereting one. Who gets more focus seems to vary from week to week at least keeping it interesting.
And now McCain seems to be enjoying the "Golden Fifteen Minutes"...
I am having an exceedingly difficult time understanding or seeing where "consumer interest" ends and "media manipulation" begins.
But of course, in the last 20 years of being aware of election politics, I am always somewhat bemused at what are final choices end up being. In recent elections, a governor of a not particular well governed state, an inexperienced governor of a not particular well governed state who was the son of an unre-elected president, an unlikeable senator from Kansas whose age was a daunting factor and was not half as charismatic as his oponent, a boring VP who was the son of an unre-elected senator, a boring senator who was from a patritican family in a state that does not enjoy a reputation nationally as being centrist...
Now we are down to the wife an an ex-prez from Illinois by way of Arkansas who is a senator for New York, a junior senator from Illinois, a multi-attempting (and failing) senator from AZ who is a perenial candidate, a governor from Massachusetts, and another Arkansas governor.
These were really the best we could find to get excited about?
By the time Ohio weighs in, it will already likely be a foregone conclusion who the nominees will be. Having been decided early on by other states.
I am not all that excited about any of the options on the menu.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,658 Likes: 3
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,658 Likes: 3 |
If Ann Coulter hates McCain.. he must be Golden!! I think she will add even more moderates and slight-right-of-centers to the McCain camp!!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,505
Member
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,505 |
Is Mc Cain really pro life. Maybe personally but will he push the issue to overturn Roe vs. Wade. If that is the case then I could not support his candidacy. Stephanos IO
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,214
Member
|
Member
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,214 |
Father,
That's a very important question.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,264
Member
|
OP
Member
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,264 |
If Ann Coulter hates McCain.. he must be Golden!! I think she will add even more moderates and slight-right-of-centers to the McCain camp!! LOL! Personally, I don't think she has THAT much influence anymore. But I still find her very insightful at times. Gordo
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,264
Member
|
OP
Member
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,264 |
Is Mc Cain really pro life. Maybe personally but will he push the issue to overturn Roe vs. Wade. If that is the case then I could not support his candidacy. Stephanos IO I guess his voting record is pretty solid...but as Terry says, that is a good question. Bush is solid on this issue - even quoting Pope John Paul II for goodness sake! Will we see the same from a McCain presidency? Some of that may depend upon who his VP choice is. If its the Huckster, I don't think McCain would get away with anything. God bless! Gordo
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,264
Member
|
OP
Member
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,264 |
Another interesting take on McCain... "Democrats say McCain nearly abandoned GOP" http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/democrats-say-mccain-nearly-abandoned-gop-2007-03-28.htmlIf it is true, can I say I am not surprised? I just watched Fox News and Ann Coulter has come out saying that Hilary is MORE conservative than John McCain! It was an hilarious exchange between Hannity, Coulter and Colmes... Gordo
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,528
Grateful Member
|
Grateful Member
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,528 |
May an outsider make a comment?
If the Republicans want to win in November 2008, they will need to do two things. They must unite their base on the political right. They must also be persuasively appealing to the nation's political middle.
I think the Republicans should evaluate their candidates along those lines.
As an outsider, I would observe that Mr. Huckabee as a vice presidential candidate could unite the Republican base. I would also observe that either Mr. McCain or Mr. Romney as the presidential nominee could be appealing to the nation's political middle.
But, that is just an outsider's observation. I apologize if I spoke out of place.
-- John
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,214
Member
|
Member
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,214 |
The Republicans haven't been united since 1994 to 1996 when they took over congress and had their backs broken over school lunch. It would be very important for them to be united. It will take a lot of heated back room politics to accomplish that.
Terry
Last edited by Terry Bohannon; 02/01/08 01:34 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 487
Member
|
Member
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 487 |
Coulter has always been a grandstander, but one point that she makes is worth repeating. There are many many conservatives out there who will not under any circumstance vote for Juan McCain. I am an example of this. There is no way in the world under any possible scenario that I will vote for Juan McCain. Now I wouldn't go a far as Coulter and say that I'm voting for Hillary, but I guess it's time to start researching who the Libertarian and Constitutional Parties candidates are. Monomakh
|
|
|
|
|