Pioneer Posted September 4, 2008 Share Posted September 4, 2008 The reason Mcain is known as the Maverick, is because he does NOT soley go along with party politics. Huh!?!?!?!?! He voted WITH bush over 90% of the time the past (almost) 8 YEARS! He's not a maverick, he's a lemming! :shades: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Imawhosure Posted September 4, 2008 Share Posted September 4, 2008 Huh!?!?!?!?! He voted WITH bush over 90% of the time the past (almost) 8 YEARS! He's not a maverick, he's a lemming! :shades: That is NOT what I said!!!! I said he voted FOR democratic legislation. Praytell, tell us how many times he has voted FOR legislation authored by a democrat, or co sponsored BY a democrat! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pioneer Posted September 4, 2008 Share Posted September 4, 2008 Praytell, tell us how many times he has voted FOR legislation authored by a democrat, or co sponsored BY a democrat! Who cares. He's so close to bush, that he could be the second coming of christ and I wouldn't touch him with a 10 foot pole. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mulewright Posted September 4, 2008 Share Posted September 4, 2008 Huh!?!?!?!?! He voted WITH bush over 90% of the time the past (almost) 8 YEARS! He's not a maverick, he's a lemming! :shades: And if you take away the votes on the troop surge( which Obaaama voted against) He voted with Bush 85% of the time but guess what , Obaaama voted with Bush 70% of the time.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Floyd Lawson Posted September 4, 2008 Share Posted September 4, 2008 And if you take away the votes on the troop surge( which Obaaama voted against) He voted with Bush 85% of the time but guess what , Obaaama voted with Bush 70% of the time.... Don't confuse them with the facts, these Dems are running scared now that McCain has chosen Mrs. Palin. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taxman100 Posted September 5, 2008 Share Posted September 5, 2008 The Dems should have ran away with this election, but they chose a really weak candidate at the top of their ticket. The Republicans have done all they can do over the last eight years to give the election away, yet they still may not be able to do so. I never understand how the Dems always seem to self destruct in national elections, but I think the major reason is they actually believe the majority of Americans agree with their viewpoints. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pioneer Posted September 5, 2008 Share Posted September 5, 2008 And if you take away the votes on the troop surge( which Obaaama voted against) He voted with Bush 85% of the time but guess what , Obaaama voted with Bush 70% of the time.... 20+% less bush is better than a third term. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Len_A Posted September 5, 2008 Author Share Posted September 5, 2008 (edited) Don't confuse them with the facts, these Dems are running scared now that McCain has chosen Mrs. Palin.Hey, Floyd..this dope you're smoking...it's really starting to kill some brain cells, dude. The choice of Palin just reinforces the impression that the GOP does not want to present their platform ideas to the middle class, because very little of their platform ideas do anything to help the middle class. The choice of Palin is the neocon idea of switching the conversation from one of platform ideas on healthcare, the economy, and the Iraq war, to one of the usual neocon mainstays of "family values". It's nothing but a way to obfuscate, in typical neocon fashion. Edited September 5, 2008 by Len_A Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Imawhosure Posted September 5, 2008 Share Posted September 5, 2008 The Dems should have ran away with this election, but they chose a really weak candidate at the top of their ticket. The Republicans have done all they can do over the last eight years to give the election away, yet they still may not be able to do so. I never understand how the Dems always seem to self destruct in national elections, but I think the major reason is they actually believe the majority of Americans agree with their viewpoints. TAXMAN, you have said what eludes most of us on either side of the aisle. Because Bush screws up, Democrats think that people are willing to give up economic security for ECO SHANG RI-LA; or their vision of it anyway. And everytime the leaders of ECO SHANG RI-LA put up a guy like Al Gore or Barack, they can't figure out why they lose. On the other hand, everytime the Dems put up these type of people, the Repubs think we must go along with them because we elect them. What neither understands is--------->Most of us are are either scared to death, or pissed that these are the lousy two choices we get with a chance to win. Sure, we can vote for some non descript independent, but then we allow the rest of America to choose a President from the bottom of a barrel that is rotten. And no matter what anyone says, usually one of those apples is more rotten than the other, so if we allow the rest of America to choose wrong, we end up screwing ourselves. If we do not vote for a choice of shooting ourselves in the foot, or cutting off one of our toes; and instead vote for getting our hand slapped by a ruler which has no chance to become reality, we are absolute fools if our toe gets chopped and we don't like it, or a bullet goes through our foot and we think that was a bad choice. Eventually, someone will rise up that is a populist. Love him, or hate him, that was Ronald Reagan, and to a lesser extent, Bill Clinton. It will come when we all least expect it as everything good does. It will also be a surprise when this person arrives. They will scare the hell out of some of us, but they will lead us forward to places we never thought we could achieve. Sadly, as we all are now aware of, one of the best candidates we have had in recent memory was Lieberman. He wasn't even a candidate for President, but there is no doubt if we coulda passed over his LEAD candidate, we woulda had a winner that we all could be proud of. Hindsight is easy though. From what I see, it should be Obama against Palin, not Obama against Mcain. To most of our chagrin, the reason it is not is because WE DON'T PAY ENOUGH ATTENTION to get the great candidates out of the primarys, nor do they have the funds to advertise enough to make us listen. Thus, we end up with Presidential candidates that come from inside the political beltway of Washington, and they have no clue what we actually think, feel, or the hardships we face. Regardless if you are republican or democrat, it is difficult to understand us, if all you see of the voters is from the safe side of a bullet proof limosine window. It will not be party that rises though, as they follow partisan politics. It WILL be an individual. And that man/woman will galvinize us, because without most of us working in concert, an atom bomb would be helpless against a wooden shack!!!!!! I am waiting, as I am sure you are. That person is already amongst us, we just don't know it. I sure as hell hope they hurry up and get here though. Our country needs them now!!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Floyd Lawson Posted September 5, 2008 Share Posted September 5, 2008 Hey, Floyd..this dope you're smoking...it's really starting to kill some brain cells, dude. The choice of Palin just reinforces the impression that the GOP does not want to present their platform ideas to the middle class, because very little of their platform ideas do anything to help the middle class. The choice of Palin is the neocon idea of switching the conversation from one of platform ideas on healthcare, the economy, and the Iraq war, to one of the usual neocon mainstays of "family values". It's nothing but a way to obfuscate, in typical neocon fashion. If you're scared, say scared. Why do you think that the media is being so aggressive in attacking her. You didn't see that from the right when Biden was chosen, that's because he doesn't help Obama so there's no concern for the Republicans. You guys are very worried now, it was your election to loose and now that's exactly what's going to happen and Mrs. Palin has put the Republicans over the top. The latest CBS poll has it as even, a change of 7 points since her speech. You may want to take a different approach than accusing someone of smoking dope when trying to carry on a intellectual debate. Aren't you the guy that was on here a few weeks ago that was looking for a job? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Len_A Posted September 5, 2008 Author Share Posted September 5, 2008 If you're scared, say scared. Why do you think that the media is being so aggressive in attacking her. You didn't see that from the right when Biden was chosen, that's because he doesn't help Obama so there's no concern for the Republicans. You guys are very worried now, it was your election to loose and now that's exactly what's going to happen and Mrs. Palin has put the Republicans over the top. The latest CBS poll has it as even, a change of 7 points since her speech. You may want to take a different approach than accusing someone of smoking dope when trying to carry on a intellectual debate. Aren't you the guy that was on here a few weeks ago that was looking for a job? And you were the guy who got nasty over someone else's misfortune of being out of work for a year, so don't get sanctimonious with me, especially considering that with all your "intellect", you don't a damn thing about the job market in Detroit, especially for people with an industrial sales background. I doubt that anyone is worried on either side. Each side gets a bump in the poll after the conventions. Let's see how those numbers look after the debates. I doubt the GOP will be able to continue to define the race on the usual "family values" rhetoric with debate moderators asking specific policy questions. Let's see who gets the last laugh then. Bottom line is that with this weeks GOP convention, very little was revealed regarding the GOP & McCain's platform on specific policy issues. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mulewright Posted September 5, 2008 Share Posted September 5, 2008 And you were the guy who got nasty over someone else's misfortune of being out of work for a year, so don't get sanctimonious with me, especially considering that with all your "intellect", you don't a damn thing about the job market in Detroit, especially for people with an industrial sales background. I doubt that anyone is worried on either side. Each side gets a bump in the poll after the conventions. Let's see how those numbers look after the debates. I doubt the GOP will be able to continue to define the race on the usual "family values" rhetoric with debate moderators asking specific policy questions. Let's see who gets the last laugh then. Bottom line is that with this weeks GOP convention, very little was revealed regarding the GOP & McCain's platform on specific policy issues. At least as much as was revealed in last weeks Obaaampalooza... like how he's going to get someone else to pay for the 800 billion in new spending he's promised. Thompson had it exactly right when he said "they're not going to take water out of your side of the bucket....they're going to take it out of the other side..." yea right! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Len_A Posted September 5, 2008 Author Share Posted September 5, 2008 At least as much as was revealed in last weeks Obaaampalooza... like how he's going to get someone else to pay for the 800 billion in new spending he's promised. Thompson had it exactly right when he said "they're not going to take water out of your side of the bucket....they're going to take it out of the other side..." yea right! And what did Thompson (who should have stayed on Law & Order), Giuliani, Palin, and McCain propose during this convention mention in the way of real proposals to fix the economy, end the foreclosure crisis, get more people health care, or make the country safer? Am I missing something, or did they not even gloss over the issues? Where was the GOP platform on health care? Where were they on the Detroit auto industry? On the financial markets and the foreclosure situation? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pioneer Posted September 5, 2008 Share Posted September 5, 2008 And what did Thompson (who should have stayed on Law & Order), Giuliani, Palin, and McCain propose during this convention mention in the way of real proposals to fix the economy, end the foreclosure crisis, get more people health care, or make the country safer? Am I missing something, or did they not even gloss over the issues? Where was the GOP platform on health care? Where were they on the Detroit auto industry? On the financial markets and the foreclosure situation? They had nothing to say about any of it. McCain is trying to win it on promises of change. What I want to know is, why didn't he change anything about corruption and lobbyists in almost three decades serving in the House and Senate? The only thing of substance he has to run on is his service record, which he used last night. It took up about a quarter of his speech. I commend him and respect him for that, but sitting in a POW camp for 6 years does not make you presidential material. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RangerM Posted September 5, 2008 Share Posted September 5, 2008 (edited) They had nothing to say about any of it. McCain is trying to win it on promises of change. What I want to know is, why didn't he change anything about corruption and lobbyists in almost three decades serving in the House and Senate? Rightly or wrongly, McCain has advocated for campaign finance reform (2002) in an effort to quell overwhelming influence in public elections. The intent was good, but the method was not. You choose how you want to judge: intent or outcome. {sound of bear trap setting} He has also advocated for the Presidential line-item veto (1990s), found unconstitutional by the Supreme Court (I think), but the intent was clear; to reduce wasteful spending on undesireable government programs brought on by either corruption OR lobbyists. He says he wants to eliminate earmarks (present), which are often the result of either corruption OR lobbyists. That's three examples. The only thing of substance he has to run on is his service record, which he used last night. It took up about a quarter of his speech. I commend him and respect him for that, but sitting in a POW camp for 6 years does not make you presidential material. What record is Obama running on? Edited September 5, 2008 by RangerM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pioneer Posted September 5, 2008 Share Posted September 5, 2008 What record is Obama running on I'll admit, he doesn't have that long of a record to run on, but that is what I like about this candidate. He wasn't born with a silver spoon in his mouth. He and his family have had to work for everything they have achieved, not had it handed to him, or through favors to his family. He is about change, and that is what America needs. Change from the path our country has been on for the past eight years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MGolden Posted September 5, 2008 Share Posted September 5, 2008 Change from the path our country has been on for the past eight years. Which is what? Cite specifics please..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pioneer Posted September 5, 2008 Share Posted September 5, 2008 Which is what? Cite specifics please..... Foreign policy, the occupation of Iraq, the outsourcing of jobs, tax reform, energy production, and more fiscal responsibility. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RangerM Posted September 5, 2008 Share Posted September 5, 2008 I'll admit, he doesn't have that long of a record to run on, but that is what I like about this candidate. He wasn't born with a silver spoon in his mouth. He and his family have had to work for everything they have achieved, not had it handed to him, or through favors to his family. He is about change, and that is what America needs. Change from the path our country has been on for the past eight years. Hillary Clinton has a similar story, and she has more experience. What was Obama's appeal? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RangerM Posted September 5, 2008 Share Posted September 5, 2008 Foreign policy By doing what? , the occupation of Iraq, by presumably withdrawing, or if not, what then? the outsourcing of jobs, By doing what? (making them government employees is not an answer) tax reform, Raising taxes, is certainly a type of reform. Is that what you meant? energy production, Is the country going into the energy business? What is the 'carrot' and what is the 'stick' that Obama will use to influence energy production? and more fiscal responsibility. I keep hearing that, but with the additional spending he advocates, how does that figure? I've only heard that he will cut military spending, and raise taxes to pay for those programs. Is that the plan? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pioneer Posted September 5, 2008 Share Posted September 5, 2008 By doing what? by presumably withdrawing, or if not, what then? By doing what? (making them government employees is not an answer) Raising taxes, is certainly a type of reform. Is that what you meant? Is the country going into the energy business? What is the 'carrot' and what is the 'stick' that Obama will use to influence energy production? I keep hearing that, but with the additional spending he advocates, how does that figure? I've only heard that he will cut military spending, and raise taxes to pay for those programs. Is that the plan? Do your own homework. http://www.barackobama.com/index.php Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RangerM Posted September 5, 2008 Share Posted September 5, 2008 (edited) Do your own homework. http://www.barackobama.com/index.php That is a cop-out. If you knew your candidate, you would answer. And blindly following barackobama.com or johnmccain.com is akin to backing a football team by listening to the cheerleaders. Thanks, but no thanks. I'll stick to the independent websites and newspapers. Edited September 5, 2008 by RangerM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pioneer Posted September 5, 2008 Share Posted September 5, 2008 That is a cop-out. No, it's an attempt to give you information on a candidate without my bias attached. I'm not going to get into an in-depth argument over anybody in the campaign. I'm not going to influence anybody's decision, and nobody is going to change the way I feel. I don't blame you for sticking to the independent sites and newspapers. I just threw the site link up for the heck of it. It was actually the first time I had been there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RangerM Posted September 5, 2008 Share Posted September 5, 2008 No, it's an attempt to give you information on a candidate without my bias attached. I'm not going to get into an in-depth argument over anybody in the campaign. I'm not going to influence anybody's decision, and nobody is going to change the way I feel. I don't blame you for sticking to the independent sites and newspapers. I just threw the site link up for the heck of it. It was actually the first time I had been there. I'd rather have your bias than that which emanates from the Obama or McCain website. Your opinion (and mine) matter more, since we will decide who will hold the office for the next 4 years. I just like to know what I'm getting for my $$, and with Obama I believe I'm trading something real (McCain) for the "Mystery Box" (think "Let's make a Deal!"). For all his flaws, I believe McCain to be genuinely decent man and has our interests at heart. Is he the best man for President? No. Is he the best choice we have? I believe so. Ultimately, one will hold office. I hope he does his best. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mulewright Posted September 5, 2008 Share Posted September 5, 2008 (edited) Foreign policy, the occupation of Iraq, the outsourcing of jobs, tax reform, energy production, and more fiscal responsibility. Either McCain or Obaaama will be withdrawing from Iraq, we're already doing it... the troop surge worked and the Iraqi's are taking over control as we speak. Outsourcing of jobs... If you believe that additional corporate taxes is the way to make US operations more competitive compared to moving out of the country then Obaaama's the one you should vote for. Tax reform is a shell game , Obaaama's promising you a tax cut but increasing corporate taxes which you will pay anytime you buy something made in the US. Energy production is where the Democrats really shine... they won't substancially increase US oil production, they'll never agree to more nukes so we're down to wind and solar... which could be a good part of our energy supply sometime in the future but by the time we get it done, there won't be a domestic auto industry. Edited September 5, 2008 by mulewright Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.