RE: http://www.military.com/NewsContent/0,13319,164084,00.html

If the most important issue to be resolved in the upcoming election is the War On Terrorism, then McCain ought to keep mentioningh the war in all his speeches. There is nothing else on the McCain platform.

John was an outsider in respect to the NeoCons but by swallowing all his pride and becoming a good poodleboy on the campaign with Bush he gets to now run for President.

In the coming months he will be transformed into the 'Conservative Messiah' but I would love for someone to show me a real conservative act or deed in his resume.

John is a one trick pony. 'Stay the Course'! 'Kill our way to victory', whatever that is these days.

Keep all the tax cuts, pay for incredibly wasteful things like wars on credit and keep the move to 2 social classes in this country on track.

On topic, an attack here would be good for McCain in my opinion. In the outrage and uproar of the aftermath he can say that 5 years of killing them in Iraq was not enough. We have to keep it up there and invade Berserkistan too.

(QUOTE)"We have had great success with the surge, but to think they're not capable of orchestrating really strong attacks ... I think is an underestimation of the enemy," McCain said. (UNQUOTE)

Just last week flip-flop McCain was on the campagin trail telling his fans "My friends, we are winning in Iraq and al-Qaida is on the run."

Definitely; the following three comments are Understatements of the year!!!

1. "There is nothing else on the McCain platform."

2. "I would love for someone to show me a real conservative act or deed in his resume."

3. John is a one trick pony.

Let's look at some of Senator McCains PAST Conservative Voting Record and positions taken:

"Senator McCain voted to defund Planned Parenthood last year.

He voted to ban partial-birth abortion.

He voted for Roberts and Alito and made the case for them in the media.

Senator McCain has never voted for a tax increase.

He will continue the Bush tax cuts.

Senator McCain will end pork-barrel spending.

Senator McCain will not cut and run in Iraq.

He sponsored legislation to keep the Fairness Doctrine from becoming law.

He supports school choice.

Senator McCain will not "mandate" one-size-fits-all-universal-health-care; that all has to pay into.

He voted to convict Bill Clinton on impeachment.

Senator McCain has an ACU (American Conservative Union) rating of 82.3."

Not Bad; Is it?

Need more? OK!!!

"One of the reasons I am a small-government, less-government federalist is because every time we act as a federal government, there's intended consequences and unintended consequences. That's why I'm a conservative that fundamentally believes that less government is best government." - Senator John McCain (03.13.08)

I am a Republican because, like you, I want to relieve the American people of the heavy hand of a government that spends too much of your money on things you neither want nor need, while failing to do as well as we should the things none of us can do individually. I am a Republican because, like you, I believe government must defend our nation's security wisely and effectively, because the cost of our defense is measured in losses so hard to bear and in the heartbreak of so many families. I am a Republican because, like you, I believe government must respect our values because they are the true source of our strength; and enforce the rule of law, which is the first defense of freedom. I am a Republican because I believe the judges we appoint to the federal bench must understand that enforcing our laws, not making them, is their only responsibility. I am a Republican because I believe, like you, that government should tax us no more than necessary, spend no more than necessary, and keep out of the way of the most industrious, ingenious, and optimistic people in the history of the world . I am a Republican because I believe, like you, that it is the strength, courage, wisdom and patriotism of free people -- not the government -- who have made this country the extraordinarily successful place it is. My friends, my purpose is to preserve and strengthen our freedom, the freedom I have defended all my adult life, and I will not let anyone or anything deter me. - Senator John McCain (02.05.08)

Does Senator McCain "Walk His Talk?" I think so!

Which other Presidential Candidate has TWO sons who have (or are serving) in the Middle East Battlefronts.

The McCains will not talk about them on the Campaign; but, one of their sons just returned from his military tour in Iraq a few days ago! God Bless them All!

From A Proud Vietnam Veteran

This message has been edited. Last edited by: WesLemmon,

if he is such a conservative why does Rush and Glenn hate him so much?

I'm not convinced either Rush Limbaugh or Glenn (Beck) HATES Senator McCain.

However, both CRITICIZE Senator McCain's past actions and positions.

Why? Because both are "Entertainers" and they work for "Ratings" based on number of listeners. I enjoy listening to both. I don't always agree with them.

I don't always agree with Senator McCain. However, I agree with him much more than I do with Senator Obama or Senator Clinton. Senator McCain has the longest history of public service; thus, many Republican, Conservatives (Like MySelf) can find "things" in his history that "annoy the heck" out of us!

But, in the final evaluation, Senator McCain will be a "Superior" Number 44 as compared to Senator Clintor or Senator Obama, IMHO.

Both, Senator Clinton and Senator Obama are "honorable" public servants. And, I don't hate either. I don't think we "need to tear (with hate) either one's personal character down in our effort to push our Candidate in as Number 44. Talk Show Entertainers do their own thing for a different purpose.


From A Proud Vietnam Veteran

quote:

Originally posted by Jdubdub:
if he is such a conservative why does Rush and Glenn hate him so much?

yea kerry said he lost because of ubl endorsing him.... hehe i heard that on the news the other day...kerry himself said it...

They just have certian issues, thats all..read between the lines.

quote:

Originally posted by Jdubdub:
if he is such a conservative why does Rush and Glenn hate him so much?

Because they're idiots, along with Ann Coulter and all the other right-wing American Taliban.

NO NO NO NO NO

Ann Coulter is a delicious string bean

quote:

Senator McCain has never voted for a tax increase.

He will continue the Bush tax cuts.

Senator McCain will end pork-barrel spending.

...

He sponsored legislation to keep the Fairness Doctrine.

No offense, Wes, but his record on taxes are mixed. He didn't vote for either the 2001 or the 2003 tax cut, although he has recently flip-flopped on supporting most of them, although he is shaky on the estate tax even now.

quote:

Vote Summary

* McCain voted no on 6 tax cuts including the two big votes - final passage of the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts.
* McCain voted yes on 3 tax cuts including 2 which received near unanimous support in the Senate and were relatively non controversial.
* McCain was not present for an additional 3 tax votes, including 2 on the very important American Jobs Creation Act of 2004.
* McCain does not support permanent repeal of the estate tax, a major goal of the taxpayer movement.
* McCain has told reporters "off the record" that he would raise taxes if elected President

http://www.atr.org/content/html/mccainvotingrecord.html

The President has no power to "end pork-barrel spending" or it would be ended now.

You have his position on the Fairness doctrine backwards ... he was a co-sponsor of the Broadcaster Freedom Act, which eliminates the possibility of the FCC reinstating the Fairness Doctrine.

quote:

Originally posted by oldmole:

quote:

Senator McCain has never voted for a tax increase.

He will continue the Bush tax cuts.

Senator McCain will end pork-barrel spending.

...

He sponsored legislation to keep the Fairness Doctrine.

No offense, Wes, but his record on taxes are mixed. He didn't vote for either the 2001 or the 2003 tax cut, although he has recently flip-flopped on supporting most of them, although he is shaky on the estate tax even now.

quote:

Vote Summary

* McCain voted no on 6 tax cuts including the two big votes - final passage of the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts.
* McCain voted yes on 3 tax cuts including 2 which received near unanimous support in the Senate and were relatively non controversial.
* McCain was not present for an additional 3 tax votes, including 2 on the very important American Jobs Creation Act of 2004.
* McCain does not support permanent repeal of the estate tax, a major goal of the taxpayer movement.
* McCain has told reporters "off the record" that he would raise taxes if elected President

http://www.atr.org/content/html/mccainvotingrecord.html

The President has no power to "end pork-barrel spending" or it would be ended now.

You have his position on the Fairness doctrine backwards ... he was a co-sponsor of the Broadcaster Freedom Act, which eliminates the possibility of the FCC reinstating the Fairness Doctrine.

Not voting for a tax cut is completely different than voting to increase taxes.

He also has not flip flopped. He still states that he was against the tax cuts but will not vote to repeal them because that becomes, in essence, a tax increase - which he is against. When asked if he regrets his decision to vote against the tax cuts, he responded no.

Whether you agree with him or not, he is sticking to his platform of not raising taxes, while attempting to reign in spending.

quote:

Originally posted by Tom4869:
(QUOTE)"We have had great success with the surge, but to think they're not capable of orchestrating really strong attacks ... I think is an underestimation of the enemy," McCain said. (UNQUOTE)

Just last week flip-flop McCain was on the campagin trail telling his fans "My friends, we are winning in Iraq and al-Qaida is on the run."

How is this a flip flop? We can be "winning" and we can have AQI "on the run" while they still have the capability of executing high casualty producing attacks. No one has ever said AQI is defeated. The point is those attacks are decreasing in frequency.

Of course, stating a half truth fits much better into your argument.

SCOUTS OUT!

I mean I voted for him over Bush the first time based on his military record, but now, I just don't know...I won't vote for a democrat. but I'm a fiscal conservative and I just don't know.

and don't give me that not voting is a vote for obama stuff, I not voting for "the lesser evil" anymore.
I just don't know

quote:

Not voting for a tax cut is completely different than voting to increase taxes.

He also has not flip flopped. He still states that he was against the tax cuts but will not vote to repeal them because that becomes, in essence, a tax increase - which he is against. When asked if he regrets his decision to vote against the tax cuts, he responded no.

Whether you agree with him or not, he is sticking to his platform of not raising taxes, while attempting to reign in spending.

No offense, but that is either parsing fully worthy of William Jefferson Clinton, exceedingly doctrinaire, or downright disingenuous. Are you suggesting that repealing at least part of the tax cuts he opposed in the first place would be a flip-flop?

I simply do not understand how it can be a principled position to refuse to raise taxes to provide for the government you collectively decide you need, when the alternative is to bury yourself in debt or simply print pretty, large denomination pieces of interest-bearing paper that people will eventually refuse to buy.

While Senator McCain may fear "terrorist influence" during the elections; I have a different fear.

Points:

a. The Democrats have interejected "Racial Differences" into the political dialogue; e.g., Former Vice Presidential Candidate Ferraro's statement about Senator Obama being where he is at "because he is a black man."

b. The Democrats now have what appears to be a "white-hating, racist Pastor" to deal with; because, this Pastor raises a "serious question" of judgment by one of the Candidates.

c. The Democrats have about 997 "Superdelegates" who will decide the fate of the two "neck-to-neck" Candidates in the race for the Democratic Nomination of President.

- Each of those Superdelegates' ONE vote carries the equivalent of about 9.5 Thousand regular voters.

- At this point in time, it appears neither Senator Obama nor Senator Clinton can attain Victory without the Superdelegates. With the Superdelegates; either, can achieve victory.

d. Two very important states, Michigan and Florida, are "struggling" to achieve "Fair & Equitable" treatment at the Democratic National Convention.

e. And, the United States is involved in a very controversial war. A war overwhelming opposed by Liberal Democrats.

To me; all of this is "indicative" of a "Summer of Discontent!"

I remember the 1968 Democratic National Convention and I remember the protests (racial & anti-war) and riots that occurred during that year.

My point is; I think we're headed for another summer akin to what happened in 1968.

Just my opinion!

From A Proud Vietnam Veteran

This message has been edited. Last edited by: WesLemmon,

Way too scary to see how many people actually listen to anything Rush "the druggie" has to say!
Like listening to "Miss Clieo"(sp?)
Not that there is a clearly great candidate but I would hope not to base any decision on what this man says.

quote:

Originally posted by oldmole:

quote:

Not voting for a tax cut is completely different than voting to increase taxes.

He also has not flip flopped. He still states that he was against the tax cuts but will not vote to repeal them because that becomes, in essence, a tax increase - which he is against. When asked if he regrets his decision to vote against the tax cuts, he responded no.

Whether you agree with him or not, he is sticking to his platform of not raising taxes, while attempting to reign in spending.

No offense, but that is either parsing fully worthy of William Jefferson Clinton, exceedingly doctrinaire, or downright disingenuous. Are you suggesting that repealing at least part of the tax cuts he opposed in the first place would be a flip-flop?

I simply do not understand how it can be a principled position to refuse to raise taxes to provide for the government you collectively decide you need, when the alternative is to bury yourself in debt or simply print pretty, large denomination pieces of interest-bearing paper that people will eventually refuse to buy.

No offense taken, oldmole, but I know you are smarter than that. You must be able understand how repealing the Bush tax cuts would equate to raising taxes. People have come to expect those tax cuts and if you take them away, you are causing them to pay more taxes. Since Senator McCain is against raising taxes, he is against repealing the tax cuts. This is not at all disingenuous.

Now, since Senator McCain has stated that he is against raising taxes and he sees repealing the tax cuts as a raise in taxes, if he voted to repeal the tax cuts, you could easily make the conclusion that he flip flopped. Had he never stated those things, he would be justified in voting to repeal the tax cuts he was originally against. That would not sit very well, though, with the conservative base he is trying to win over.

As to your other point, I never stated whether I was for or against the tax cuts. I was simply stating that Senator McCain had not flip flopped. Personally, I see eye to eye with Senator McCain on this one. I was against the tax cuts because we are at war. Cutting taxes while we are trying to pay for a war does not make much sense to me. I am not, however, an economist and it appears the tax cuts had a positive effect on the economy, but it also appears that was a short term effect.

I am against raising taxes if there exists other areas we can cut spending first.

SCOUTS OUT!

Neither Hillary nor Obama are mentioning Iraq anymore as a campaign issue, but are only focusing on traditional issues. Public support for the war is growing and if there were to be more attacks, that would only enhance the McCain campaign. The democrats better be ready when McCain makes this an issue this fall.

Oldmole; regarding the last two points you made in your 10:26AM post; let me paste in two segments of the Sean Hannity interview with Senator McCain (03.13.08):

Segment One on Earmarks:
--------------------------

HANNITY: Which is why you're going to eliminate all earmarks, won't sign a bill with them.

MCCAIN: Absolutely. There's $35 billion in earmark projects in the last two big appropriations bills. That could have been a $1,000 tax credit for every child in America.

HANNITY: Yes.

MCCAIN: Instead of the "Bridge to Nowhere."
========================================

Segment Two on Fairness Doctrine:

---------------------------------

HANNITY: Do you support the Fairness Doctrine?

MCCAIN: No. I do not. I think the Fairness Doctrine might shut down Hannity's program.

HANNITY: It would. I think it would.

MCCAIN: If you're required to do that, then it is — it would shut down, I think, voices in America.

HANNITY: It would ruin the format because stations...

MCCAIN: Oh sure. Yes.

HANNITY: ... would be forced to take on shows that are not financially viable.

MCCAIN: It's one of the most misnamed...

HANNITY: The Fairness Doctrine. So we're on the same page.

MCCAIN: Yes.

++++++++++++++++++++++++

I've got to leave for the day; but, I stand by my previous comments.

From A Proud Vietnam Veteran