 |
Quote:
Originally Posted by inthebox
Hillary tried and failed. In fact she went 0 for 20 in primary debates. McCain will be given every opportunity in the general election debates to expose the "empty rhetoric" proclaimed by his supporters and use it for prosecution. Let's see how well that works out for your spokesman after cross examination being face to face with Obama. :rolleyes:
Actually, I wish it were an unscripted head to head townhall kind of debate in which the candidates can't just whip out their talking points.
We really need both candidates to hammer out their points. The network moderators will receive pitches from both campaigns, usually a compromise, and have various debate formats to satisfy both candidates. This might give McCain an opportunity to prove he's not just another Bush clone. Although that's going to be a hard sale no matter what the format.
Bobby, you're starting to sound like Howard Dean. Should we expect a scream soon? What makes it a harder sale for McCain is the media has done a 180 on their former favorite. I heard one of the many "Democratic strategists" that seem to pop up out of nowhere this morning try to explain that McCain, not Obama, was still the media favorite. LOL!Quote:
Originally Posted by BABRAM
We know that is not the fact . The NY slimes turned on him as soon as he became the nominee.
Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
Huh?? What the hell did I miss? Howard Dean spoke recently on which possible general election debate platforms that are to be used? The same Howard Dean that I chastised for letting the Clinton primary circus continue far so long? BTW I've been shouting at George Walker Bush for two terms now. That also has nothing to do with the media and everything to do with Dubya. ;)
What did you miss?
Howard the Deaniac and McMahon were spreading that nonsense long before Obama - or you - adopted that talking point... I get their emails :DQuote:
his might give McCain an opportunity to prove he's not just another Bush clone.
Come on, you're more original than that my friend.
1) So? I don't receive Howard Dean emails.Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
2) If that's what H. Dean implied, before my own original thoughts on the issue, then I give him credit.
3) When two people come to the same conclusion, arbitrarily, perhaps there is substance.
:cool:
Or, since I've been mentioning it since early February and Obama has made it his favorite point (besides uhhh), the "conclusion" was an unconscious selection ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by BABRAM
Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
I suggest you supplement with vitamins regularly. Did you really think that Howard Dean and I are the only two people on the planet that sees minute differences between Dubya and McSame. Like I said, come general election debate time, McCain will get a chance to prove otherwise. :rolleyes:
A Corona with lime is more fun... and tastier.Quote:
Originally Posted by BABRAM
Since it's been splashed across every newspaper in the country and repeated on every news channel for months by every Democrat talking head, it's easy to see it's the "company line." :rolleyes:Quote:
Did you really think that Howard Dean and I are the only two people on the planet that sees minute differences between Dubya and McSame. Like I said, come general election debate time, McCain will get a chance to prove otherwise. :rolleyes:
It's not the company line, it's the truth:Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
John McSame - Progressive Media USA
Senator John McCain has voted with President Bush 100% of the time in 2008 and 95% of the time in 2007
About 4 minutes worth of research reveals McCain voted AGAINST the party 391 times since Bush has been in office. I told you, I come prepared.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
And I've got news for you! The "company" has known since day one of Dubya's second term, and it wasn't even a coordinated effort. :)
I wasn't referring to the party, I was referring to his loyalty to Bush. And frankly some of the things he has voted against is quite apppaling.Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
It's funny how the media has portrayed McCain as a "maverick" for all these years, he's voted against his party (whose top figure is the President) 391 times since Bush has been president - and now you guys are painting him as an EXTREME Bush loyalist based on this year and last when he's missed most of the votes. LOL, that's a very weak argument.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
I don't see how that's relevant since the "company line" is a "third Bush term," and it only surfaced when it became clear McCain would be the nominee. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by BABRAM
I'll help you "Steve." A president in the US can only run for two terms; Civics 101. The Republican party, unless they decided not to run a candidate for president in 2008 (did you think they would not?? ), would have to champion another clone. They did. His name turned out to be "John McCain." Oh! It could had been Mitt RomGeorge, or Mike HuckaBush, or Fred ThompWalker, or even Rudy Dubyani. Not much separates their views either. The only Republican to choose from with any major differences from George Walker Bush would had been Ron Paul. But Paul was ostracized by the other candidates. He wasn't part of the good'ol boy clone club.;)!;)!;)!Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
Or in 08 it could be Barack "Jimmy Carter" Obama
Even TIME notes the similarities;
Quote:
Of the two likely nominees this year, Obama is closest to Carter in background and policy leanings. The parallels between his campaign so far and the one Carter ran in 1976 are striking. Like Carter, Obama had little national experience when he started to run. Neither was given much chance of winning the nomination. Instead of running on a detailed platform, Carter told crowds that what Washington needed was "a government as good as its people"—just as Obama promises "change we can believe in." Carter's message sold well after Richard Nixon's disgrace, and press accounts from the time suggest that people found the born-again Carter to be charismatic. That parallel is a promising one for Obama.
Barack Carter the humanitarian vs. McSame Iraqi war? Carter was weak on economics with the double digit inflation, but our nation currently is suffering under Dubya. McCain will just keep up his policies, perhaps worse. McCain even admits he's weak on economics. Give me Jimmy and the Billy Beer, every time!Quote:
Originally Posted by inthebox
I wish McCain would give President Bush some credit. He is running as if he invented the Surge .Here was part of his ill-timed address last night:
I disagreed strongly with the Bush administration's mismanagement of the war in Iraq . I called for the change in strategy that is now, at last, succeeding where the previous strategy had failed miserably. I was criticized for doing so by Republicans. I was criticized by Democrats. I was criticized by the press. But I don't answer to them. I answer to you. And I would be ashamed to admit I knew what had to be done in Iraq to spare us from a defeat that would endanger us for years, but I kept quiet because it was too politically hard for me to do. No ambition is more important to me than the security of the country I have defended all my adult life.
Nonsense. It was President Bush who risked all by defying conventional wisdom in the form of the Baker Iraq Surrender Report ;and adopted a plan drawn up by General Petraeus... not McCain. I'll give McCain credit for getting on board ,and for calling for more troops . But the plan adopted was not McCain's .
Um, duh.Quote:
Originally Posted by BABRAM
LOL, as I pointed out to NK, McCain voted AGAINST Bush's "rubber-stamp Republicans" 391 times during Bush's tenure. That's an average of about 52 times per year. Some "clone."Quote:
The Republican party, unless they decided not to run a candidate for president in 2008 (did you think they would not?? ), would have to champion another clone. They did. His name turned out to be "John McCain."
Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
I over simplified, since you asked. :rolleyes:
Reality check time, "Steve."Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
McCain Voted With Bush 100 Percent Of The Time In 2008 - Politics on The Huffington Post
John McSame
May 27, 2008 12:55 pm posted by Jason Rosenbaum
CQ's Presidential Support studies try to determine how often a legislator votes in line with the President's position:
CQ tries to determine what the president personally, as distinct from other administration officials, does and does not want in the way of legislative action. This is done by analyzing his messages to Congress, news conference remarks and other public statements and documents.
So, these studies only track votes when the President has an explicit, stated opinion on a bill.
According to CQ, Senator John McCain has voted with President Bush 100% of the time in 2008 and 95% of the time in 2007:
Presidential Support
Year .....................................Support...... ...Oppose
2008 (through May 15, 2008)......100%..........0%
2007..........................................95%. ..........5%
2006..........................................89%. ........11%
2005..........................................77%. ........23%
2004..........................................92%. ..........8%
2003..........................................91%. ..........9%
2002..........................................90%. .........10%
2001..........................................91%. ..........9%
CQ's Presidential Support numbers do not include votes that legislators miss - in other words, missing a vote on an issue Bush supported did not lower McCain's score. Now, it is a well known fact that Senator McCain misses the most votes in the Senate. In fact, he was crowned the most absent Senator in 2008. Therefore, when John McCain even bothered to show up and vote in the Senate - which wasn't often - he voted with Bush 100% of the time.
John McCain and George Bush believe the same things on virtually every issue - the list of their agreements goes on for pages. But a better judge of a politician's views is not how he talks, but how he votes. John McCain - when it counted and when he showed up in the Senate to do his job in 2008 - never deviated from George Bush's position. Not once. 100%.
It's all there in black and white. John McSame - just like Bush.;)
Bobby,
You forgot to bold this part:
Quote:
Now, it is a well known fact that Senator McCain misses the most votes in the Senate. In fact, he was crowned the most absent Senator in 2008. Therefore, when John McCain even bothered to show up and vote in the Senate - which wasn't often - he voted with Bush 100% of the time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
Thanks. So true!
Please tell me how often this year Sen Obama has held meetings of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee's Subcommittee on European Affairs that he chairs .How often as chair of this committee has he visited Europe to confer with the Europeans ( he will talk to the Mahdi Hatter but not our allies ?)?Subcommittee chairmanship represents a significant responsibility;and Obama has been a no-show. The role of NATO in Afghanistan and Iraq ;European energy policy and European responses to climate change,our role in NATO are all part of his perview .But he has been too busy campaigning .
So either both candidates take a hit for attendance or both get a pass. Your choice.
Tom, I hear you. Neither get a pass. But one of the candidates vote most often the same as Dubya, and it's not Barack Obama.
I've already refuted NK's rehashed argument. Out of 141 votes this year he's missed 105, and so that's an accurate gauge of his votes along Bush's line? LOL! You guys want it both ways, you wanted to applaud him for being a maverick for working across party lines and bucking his party - averaging 52 votes per year against the GOP - so much so that he reportedly contemplated switching parties at least twice, and now you want to paint him as a Bush clone. All the while mocking us for not being thrilled with McCain for those very reasons. Unbelievable.Quote:
Originally Posted by BABRAM
I never said he was a maveirck, I never said he attempts to work across party lines - he's a puppet of the neocons.Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
For I believe the 5th time I've said this now, that's not true. I've furnished the links, look it up and don't rely on spin like NK.Quote:
Originally Posted by BABRAM
I'm not spinning - I've provided my facts fella. When Johnny-boy voted against his fellow repubs it's most likely 'cause his little buddy George did too. But when George voted "Yay" so did Johnny "THE MAVERICK" McCain.
Hehe, the irony of you telling me that I "spin" stuff. Harhar - that's your job here!
"Most likely" is not a fact, NK. An accurate way to put it is McCain voted with the president a majority of the time - as did most Republicans. If it's supposed to be earth-shattering news that Republicans voted with their Republican president a majority of the time then you need to get out more. But to choose this year and last - when McCain (along with Clinton and Obama) missed so many votes while campaigning as "factual evidence" that he is a Bush Clone is spin. The first comment on the post you cited is right, it's "a stupid, misleading statistic."Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
I'll put my facts up against your spin any day.Quote:
Hehe, the irony of you telling me that I "spin" stuff. Harhar - that's your job here!
"You guys" is referring to the left and the media in general. As recently as January the NY Times was calling him just that.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
But hey, the left and the media can always tear down what they built up right?Quote:
Is John McCain, the maverick flyboy of the Republican Party, becoming the candidate of the Republican establishment?
Mr. McCain, who has delighted in sticking his thumb in the eye of mainstream Republicans throughout his political career, is now accumulating a base of support among party regulars who see him as the strongest general election candidate in the remaining Republican field.
Year after year, McCain has voted same as Dubya, a high percentage part of the time. That's a fact. NK is from Canada and although I agree with HIS understanding of this election, please don't trying using her as an excuse. People in Canada are just as smart, have computers, speak English (and French), and can make up their own minds, as well as Americans. I see nothing HE opinionated that so outrageous that Americans haven't expressed one time or another.Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
Please, I'm an individual, not "the left" or the media. Try to treat people as individuals. I'm not a "you guys" since I'm quite moderate.Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
Um... he.Quote:
Originally Posted by BABRAM
Just a redneck bit of opinion about McCain being a Bush clone. You ain't going to get many people who supported Bush to believe that for a New York minute!!
HE. Yes "HE" indeed. My bad. I corrected it. Thank you, sir.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
And at the time I was responding to Bobby, not you. See that little "originally posted by BABRAM" thing up there? Besides, I'm a Texan, "you guys" is everyday parlance.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
I don't think either, George W. Bush or John McCain are conservative enough for their constituents, but fact is McCain has voted same as Dubya, a high percentage part of the time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Galveston1
According to CQ, Senator John McCain has voted with President Bush 100% of the time in 2008 and 95% of the time in 2007:
Presidential Support
Year... Support... Oppose
2008 (through May 15, 2008)... 100%... 0%
2007... 95%.. . 5%
2006... 89%.. . 11%
2005... 77%.. . 23%
2004... 92%.. . 8%
2003... 91%.. . 9%
2002... 90%.. . 10%
2001... 91%.. . 9%
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:12 PM. |