Calor Calor

McCain outlines same old failed policies

▼

McCain outlines same old failed policies

Acceptance speech merely a rehash

from JoeUser Forums

McCain's speech has proven a couple of things. Number one, he is not a great speaker. Number two, his prescription to solve America's ills are to do more of the same.

McCain, who votes with Bush 90 percent of the time, thinks the solution to our problems is to give the rich more money, keep spending the country's blood and treasure in Iraq, and hope everything turns out okay. That's the definition of insane.

McCain calls for lower taxes. Taxes were higher in the 90s and that seemed to work okay. If Bill Gates prefers Obama you have to wonder the wisdom of Republican economic policies.

McCain's experience in Vietnam proves he is made of stern stuff. But no offense but that was nearly 40 years ago. What has he done since?

The only things McCain is really known for since he decided to make "his country his life" was have an affair on the wife that waited for him to be released in order to marry a rich younger woman, accept money from special interest groups, The keating-5 scandal, and the passage of legislation that made possible the 501c political entities that Republicans claim to hate. I know why Democrats don't like him. But why on earth would a Republican want to claim this man? Even on immigration McCain supports policies Republicans don't like. 

John McCain is like the worst of both worlds. He's an economic disaster with misguided foreign policy judgment. After 8 years of cowboy diplomacy, record deficits, and mounting economic stress, we have had enough. It is time for change.

democrat
40,680 views 69 replies
Reply #26 from Stardock Forums Top

You know Robin Hood robbed from the rich and gave to the poor, right? Conservatives and McCain supporters around here generally don't like giving to the poor much from what I've read, so are you sure Robin Hood would be a savior?
End of quote

Robin Hood robbed from the tax collectors and gave to the poor.

McCain's tax returns show he has given far more in charitable donations than Obama.

And what do you base your statement that conservatives around here don't like giving to the poor? My family gives thousands a year to charitable organizations. We just don't agree with the government taking our money by force to give to the poor with politicians claiming the high ground on compassion because they support taking our earnings.

Reply #27 from PolMach Forums Top

Conservatives and McCain supporters around here generally don't like giving to the poor much from what I've read,
End of quote

I'm unemployed and am drawing checks.  The unemployment website has a statement up about how Bush (a conservative) extended the legal amount of time people can draw unemployment.  I hate needing this help, but for the moment I do.  Thank God a conservative was looking out for me during this dark period in my life.  As much as Bush and many of the Republican leadership have disappointed me, they did not abandon me during my hour of need.  To say conservatives don't want to do anything to help the poor is an outright lie, and I'm living proof.

Groupy 2 - Organize multiple applications into grouped tabs on your Windows desktop
Reply #28 from PolMach Forums Top

Pretty much the reason we have elections. We get to decide what's 'worse.'
End of quote

Agreed Diawa:)

Reply #29 from PolMach Forums Top

No, only for the "victims" and those who think they are owed - because they are.
End of quote

 

Those people should be left in the dust, leaches are no good and should get no help and Obama has said as much, but lets not forget as well that rich people can think they are "OWED" and be leaches as well.  No bid contracts ring a bell.

Reply #30 from Stardock Forums Top

seriously? If there was ever a candidate that was NOT about issues, it's OBAMA!
End of quote

Really?????

You guys never amaze me about how you confront reality and facts !!!! you ignore them with a staright face ... that is admirable for sure. That point was made by McCain's people ..... and you still argue about it??? very admirable indeed !!!!

 

As opposed to an old politician and a beauty king. Choose your poison.
End of quote

A skinny man with a funny name is a beauty king???????

and is there such thing as "old politician"? arnt they all? even the beauty queen is an old beautician (sorry ... i meant Politician :D  ) ... she's been there for a looong time ....

I feel for you guys ... really .... you are doing your best to spin the fiasco .... too bad it is not working ....

keep preaching to the choir ... the congregation has left and you are standing alone holding an empty bag. sooner or later you will have to cover your heads with it. Nov. 4th is not far off.

 

Reply #31 from JoeUser Forums Top

The TA types have shown up here before each of the last 2 presidential elections, spewing disdain & contempt, cheerfully laughing at the unwashed, kindly sharing their condescending bullshit with us.  Strangely, they've all disappeared completely by midnight on the day of the last 2 elections.  I doubt we'll have to put up with TA beyond November 4th.

Reply #32 from JoeUser Forums Top

Agreed Diawa:)
End of quote

Always good to find common ground. ;)

Reply #33 from JoeUser Forums Top

At least he is honest.
End of quote

 

McCain is far from being honest these days.....He's being led like a puppy dog by his campaign strategists which is quite disturbing. As I said before I used to like the guy as far as politicians go but he seems to get worse every day. He's using Bush's speechwriters which is a problem. He ought to be editing his speeches before using them because Straight Talk no longer applies to what he is throwing out at the public these days.

Reply #34 from JoeUser Forums Top

A skinny man with a funny name is a beauty king???????
End of quote

OK, I agree (some of the glassy eyed MSM left might disagree), lets say "rock star" (wannabe).

and is there such thing as "old politician"? arnt they all?
End of quote

Well when your attack ad sites the oil debate for lasting 30 years and McCain being part of the problem since he was a senator for 26 years, yes it is an issue. Especially when you then choose a VP that has been an insider since Nixon was president. What was he? An innocent bystander? Or do you just fail to see the hypocrisy of it?

Reply #35 from PolMach Forums Top

You know who else was a "rock star" (wannabe)? Tony Blair.

 

He trumpeted change, wanted to be popular above all, and promised to transform politics.

 

He went to war in Iraq, pledging 'change' against the dictatorship there.

 

Change is a dangerous thing.

Reply #36 from Stardock Forums Top

An innocent bystander? Or do you just fail to see the hypocrisy of it?
End of quote

No hypocrisy on my part at all ... again at all. I realize that Biden is a washington insider as much as McCain. But he is not the main man .. he will follow Obama's lead. the real hypocrisy is to say that McCain and his VP are agents of change. Even assuming Palin is a new and not an insider, she is still not the main policy maker here. This whole discussion is made meaningless by you guys pumping palin as if she was the top of the ticket.

the only criterion for any VP is that he/she should be qualified to hold the office in an emergency situation. On that basis she is not qualified, Biden is regardless of whether he is an insider or not.

stick to the issues and you will see the difference clearly .... but you guys are doing your best to avoid that .... you talk about "celebrity", "messiah", "big speeches" ... etc. not once anyone discussed the difference in policies or leadership qualities of the two on top the tickets.

McCain's campaign went on a negative spree before coming up with the Palin's gimmick.

I realize one thing though ... the GOP are all excited because palin is a pro-lifer. This is the only meaningful issue you care about .... nothing else matters ..... as if the whole country will fall or survive based on that.

There are more pressing issues facing this nation .. but none of you care about that ..... all what matters is being anti-aportion. as if this is not a private matter .. while you cry against anyone who brings out-of-wedlock sex as an issue and say that is private !!!! who is hypocrite here? .... aportion is not private and having babies out-of-wedlock is??????? for someone who says abstinance is the only way to go as far as family planning is concerned?

Just so you know .... i am against aportion except in a very limited cases and only during the first 3 months of pregnancy ... but even more against out-of-wedlock sex ....

but this is only one issue and it is a personal one at that ... it does not affect others in any way .... but you guys make it as if it is the central issue and palin is qualified based on that.

be serious and i will be more than happy to debate the issues with you. my sarcasim is the only appropriate way to respond to the nonsense of trying to offer palin as a qualified candidate for the VP.... it is laughable ... really ... and as a politician ... true to form she started her campaign with outright lies about her opposition to earmarks, about her abuse of power, about her skills as executive while she left her town in debt ... etc.

Now, before  you dismiss any of the above facts please check them and see if they are true or not .... is that what you want in a VP? a liar? a hypocrite who doesnt practice what she preaches? especially regarding abstinence?  then again ... the man on top of her ticket is a major hypocrite ... he sold all his past for this nomination ... again check that before you respond. in 2000 he learned that if he didnt submit he will never get it .... and he surely did.

 

Reply #37 from JoeUser Forums Top

Obama's policies are nothing new.  Raising taxes, slashing the defense budget, and making sure our intelligence agencies are hamstrung and unable to do their jobs.

Reply #38 from JoeUser Forums Top

Now, before you dismiss any of the above facts please check them and see if they are true or not
End of quote

Sorry, you want us to believe any of it, show us your research.  Empty claims aren't worth the electrons used to make them.

Reply #39 from JoeUser Forums Top

McCain, who votes with Bush 90 percent of the time, thinks the solution to our problems is to give the rich more money,

End of quote

I thought they were going for tax cuts, i.e. letting the rich keep their money; now they are giving money to the rich? That's insane!

 

keep spending the country's blood and treasure in Iraq, and hope everything turns out okay.

End of quote

Yes, that can never work.

As I was thinking when I was playing Super Mario Brothers back in Germany, invading a country and spending lots of monies rebuilding it just doesn't work. No good ever came of it.

 

That's the definition of insane.

End of quote

McCain, likt Bush, simply advocates the hope that Iraq will somehow turn into a rich liberal democracy because of the invasion and rebuilding; but as all the "anti-war" protesters in Germany know, this has never worked before.

McCain and Bush hope in vain. Hope doesn't work. Regime change doesn't work.

We need a candidate who doesn't hope or support change.

We need a candidate who knows that hope is a useless stupidity and that change doesn't work; who supports keeping things like they are, with Saddam in power in Iraq and civil wars in Sudan and Liberia.

We need a no-hope and no-change candidate.

We need Obama!

 

Reply #40 from JoeUser Forums Top

Conservatives and McCain supporters around here generally don't like giving to the poor much from what I've read, so are you sure Robin Hood would be a savior?
End of quote

Actualy, you are wrong.  Conservatives give to the poor in much greater numbers and percentages than liberals.

Now if you are saying that conservatives dont give YOUR money to the poor, instead giving their own, then you would be correct.  Conservatives believe giving from their own wallet, not robbing yours to give.

Reply #41 from JoeUser Forums Top

Even assuming Palin is a new and not an insider, she is still not the main policy maker here. This whole discussion is made meaningless by you guys pumping palin as if she was the top of the ticket.
End of quote

YOu finally hit the problem - partially.  It is not only the republicans pushing it, but the democrats.  Perhaps you can explain why the democrats are campaigning against Palin, and not McCain?

Reply #42 from JoeUser Forums Top

the only criterion for any VP is that he/she should be qualified to hold the office in an emergency situation. On that basis she is not qualified, Biden is regardless of whether he is an insider or not.
End of quote

ON that basis, Obama is not qualified to hold the office at any time.  So what is your point?  A statement ago, you made a valid point, and then poved mine.

Now, before you dismiss any of the above facts please check them and see if they are true or not
End of quote

What facts?  You just stated opinion.  And did not even try to couch them as facts (good for you on that last part).

 

Reply #43 from Stardock Forums Top

is that what you want in a VP? a liar? a hypocrite who doesnt practice what she preaches? especially regarding abstinence?  then again ... the man on top of her ticket is a major hypocrite ... he sold all his past for this nomination ... again check that before you respond. in 2000 he learned that if he didnt submit he will never get it .... and he surely did.

 

End of quote

LOL.  Palin isn't the one pregnant, so she can't practice what she preaches about abstinence.  I would be more concerned about what Obama was doing at 17 than the daughter of a VP candidate. 

What about the plagarist Biden?  Don't see you criticizing him for his lies and BS over the what....30 years as a Washington hack.

And you think Obama is not a hypocrite....oh please.  Keep drinking the Obamessiah kool-aid.

Reply #44 from JoeUser Forums Top



Now, before  you dismiss any of the above facts please check them and see if they are true or not .... is that what you want in a VP? a liar? a hypocrite who doesnt practice what she preaches? especially regarding abstinence?

End of quote



Ok, let's check the "above facts".

You are saying that Sarah Palin is a hypocrite because she "doesn't practice what she preaches", "especially regarding abstinence".

I don't know what Sarah Palin said about abstinence, but I do seem to remember that she is married and just gave birth to a handicapped child (presumably from her husband). It seems to me that calling a married mother of a handicapped child a "liar" and "hypocrite" for not practicing abstinence is a bit rude.

Can you list any other "facts" about Mrs Palin, ideally with source, that make you as angry as her refusal to practice abstinence?

 

Reply #45 from PolMach Forums Top

After reading some of the comments and this story it is now time to interject some REAL FACTS.  First, I am not for EITHER CANDIDATE!  This is a fact. 

The Author states that McCain has voted for Bush 90% (this is a wrong percentage) yet he has gone against his party 33% of the time before.    Obama since becoming a senator has nearly 100% of the time voted with his party which leaves oh about .01% of the time against his party.  You can see this at the congressional quarterly voting study. 

Alaska and Delaware have very close population sizes so enough with the argument of small states. BOTH STATES ARE SMALL STATES! 

The author also states "But no offense but that was 40 years ago" essentially what does that have to do with today.  This shows a person character.  For example Biden, somebody here has stated that McCain has lied while Biden has consistly lied as well.  Biden has lied about that he graduated at the top of his class, said that he had a ful scholarship, and that he has three degrees.  It won't allow me to cut and paste websites but go to the NY Times and search for Biden admits error and criticizes the last report.  What someone has done x number of years ago to now has a lot to do.  Biden has shown that he is a consistent liar.  What we do sometime ago affects has in the present.  Yes, people do change but Biden has lied in the past, he's lied in the present.  This doesn't mean he will or won't lie in the future.  It is consistent with his personality and Vegas would put the odds that he will continue to lie about his character (each of those lies were dealing with his character and him trying to make himself seem like a better person)

Smoothsea said "that McCain has stated before that he knows little about economics."  At least he's willing to admit that instead of trying to make himself look better by saying that he has multiple degrees got great grades ect ect.  This statement is true, but again WHY DON"T YOU TYPE THE REST OF THE STORY!!!!  Here is part of that speech by McCain "....The issue of economics is something I've really never understood as well as I should.  I understand the BASICS, the fundamentals, the vision, all that kind of stuff. but I would like to have someone I'm close to that really is good strong economist.  As long as Alan Greenspan is I would certainly use him for advice and counsel."

Well, I don't want to interject too much, because I know some people like living in their world of make believe.  Again I DO NOT LIKE McCain, but I also do not like neonates totting around half truths.

Reply #46 from JoeUser Forums Top

Props to you t_P_P. :thumbsup:

Reply #47 from JoeUser Forums Top

Quoting Daiwa, reply 21
Props to you t_P_P.
End of Daiwa's quote

Ditto!

Reply #48 from PolMach Forums Top

The Author states that McCain has voted for Bush 90% (this is a wrong percentage) yet he has gone against his party 33% of the time before. Obama since becoming a senator has nearly 100% of the time voted with his party which leaves oh about .01% of the time against his party. You can see this at the congressional quarterly voting study.
End of quote

McCain himself said he was proud to vote with Bush 90% of the time.  That would represent what we have had the last 8 years.  I think Obama's point is that, that is not change.  He has voted with his party 96% of the time, his party and him representing the change.  His party representing the change in policy/platform and Obama himself representing the change in Washington politics and that of getting rid of the broken system we have there where special interests and PAC's rule.

Reply #49 from JoeUser Forums Top

He has voted with his party 96% of the time, his party and him representing the change.
End of quote

So that's what we've had the past 2 years?  Change?

Reply #50 from JoeUser Forums Top

A majority of 51/49 in the Senate really doesn't help to get legislation passed after veto.  2/3 votes is a little tough to come by with the partisan bickering.  I agree that the new seats in Congress have done little to change how things are happening, but regardless, there needs to be more compromising in the houses and less complaining to the tune of "our side is right, your side is wrong".  Also, we could all do without the ridiculous provisions trying to be snuck into every single piece of important legislature which causes even more chaos and less progress -- on every side of the picture.