Comments for So, You Want to Talk About John Mccain? »
Posted By Bkumm 1 year, 8 months ago in NewsTo many people, John McCain sounds rational, reasonable, and maybe even Presidential. But, if we dig a little deeper, we can see that he is just more of the same old, same old that has gotten us to where we are today.
Read Full Story at newsflavor.com »
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentComments So Far: 236
-
Neutral
GHOSTWHOWALKS1 year, 8 months ago
-
-
-
Neutral
Goppy1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The writer of that story is WACKED!
tOtally, compleEtly WHACKED!
The Problem with this artikal? It dint have no jingoism and propaganda in it.
We Christian Conservatives LOVE jingoism.
Here. Let me show you how we liek it.
"OBAMA IS A RACIST WHO IS GOINTA ENSLAVE ALL WHITE FOLK AND SEND OUT THEM ROBOTS LIEK WE SAW IN 'THE MINORITY REPORT' THAT WILL SEEK ALL WHITE FOLK OUT AND CAUSE US TO GO BLIND."
See. That's they way we liek our political observation.
And aint nuthin you ken do to shake us outta that way of seein stuff.
Look, we voted for GW, and HE was a no account draft dodger who finagled a free stadium (paid for by taxin the middle class of Arlington) - and who strategized the poll numbers to calculate that if he got EVERY SINGLE FUNDAMENTALIST CHRISTIAN (liek me) to vote for im, hed win!
I mean, this guy was a DRAFT DODGIN ZEEEERO!
And we STILL voted for him!
But if you shake the black/white tree - thats certifiable bad trouble. And we wont vote for that.
Reply -
-
Neutral
Bacalao1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Huh, In any of the states that had an open primary(mine for example) anyone could cross party lines in any direction. heck, I'm a registered Libertarian, if it weren't for open primaries I wouldn't have had a vote at all.
BTW, I didn't vote for McWar, I voted for another candidate in the republican primary, One that I thought would be good not for me, not for those like me, not for my locality, but, FOR MY NATION!
Reply -
-
-
-
-
Neutral
Bkumm1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
If we're to believe those on the conservative side Senator Obama wants to spend something on the order of $800 billion to help the poor throughout the world, even though there is NO mention of a dollar amount in the bill.
If they are THAT concerned about money that isn't even talked about yet, how do they get past supporting a guy that says he's going to "fix" Social Security with private accounts, continue the war in Iraq (and heaven only knows where else) AND lower taxes on everyone and businesses? Where is all of this magic money going to come from? China? India? Russia? Oh, yeah, they love us long time.
Reply-
-
Neutral
amazed1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
private accounts WOULD fix social security -- or at least make it a whole lot better than it is now. It would still be a payroll deduction with severe penalties on employers who didn't deposit the funds on time. It would not be some open-ended thing with people allowed to invest in anything they wanted like Honest John's Used Speculative Funds == there would probably be an array of funds to choose from -- from very conservative to somewhat (but not extremely) agrressive growth funds.
Do you really favor just saying "nevermind" and hightailing from Iraq right now (and when you give a definite withdrawal date, it might as well be today-- that's obvious).
Obama just voted for a bill to give .07% of our GNP to the UN, for crying out loud -- the same UN that pretty well has absolutely no use whatsoever for the US.
Reply-
Neutral
Bkumm1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Excuse my French, but that's horse hockey.
Private accounts wouldn't "fix" Social Security. How could they? And what you're suggesting isn't any more free market than what we do now. What is required to "fix" Social Security is really quite simple and it can be done in three easy steps:
1. Take SS out of the general budget. In other words, keep Congress from using the money for anything other than SS.
2. Raise the retirement age to 70.
3. Raise the cap on taking SS taxes. Right now the cap is around $85,000. Raise it to $150,000 at least.
Iraq is a complex issue, but we can not continue down this road. We simply can't pay for it. It's not a matter of morals its a matter of economics.
And show me specifically, in the bill, where Senator Obama voted to give .07% of our GNP or GDP to the UN. Show me.
Reply-
Neutral
Lurch1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
4. SS is poverty insurance - those who don`t need it to live on, shouldn`t get it.
You pay auto insurance right? If you don`t get in a crash, do you get your money back?
Same for poverty insurance, if you don`t wind up in poverty, why should you get your money back? If this was a private scheme for the profit of a few powerful elite, the right-wingers wouldn`t have a problem with paying more and getting less.
The power of brain washing...
Reply
-
-
-
-
Neutral
walden31 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I disagree with the author concerning gun rights. Yeah, people should be allowed to purchase semi-autos with high capacity magazines. What makes an assault weapon is all cosmetics. No, people should not be able to sue a gun shop for a murderer's deeds anymore than they should be able to sue Chrysler for a drunk driver's deeds.
I do think that gun control is a weak link in for the Democratic Party. Many, many, many people vote Republican because of the Democrats' position of weakening gun rights.
I disagree with McCain on abortion and gay rights.
You see I'm all about freedom and empowering people to make their own decisions.
Reply-
Neutral
Bkumm1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Good for you. I don't think the author is against gun ownership, but if you can show me a legitimate reason why a regular citizen should own an assault weapon with armor piercing rounds and an extended clip, I'd love to see it.
And as for being able to sue the manufacturer, I agree in 99% of the cases it shouldn't be done. However, I do remember a case where the weapon was designed, by the manufacturer, to be easy to change from semi-auto to full auto with a simple kit. The weapon was then used to kill and wound several people. That isn't to say that semi-auto is just as dangerous, it is, but it is to say that the manufacturer was violating the spirit if not the letter of the law and should be held liable.
Reply-
Neutral
SonOfTheMask1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The legitimate reason is that the Constitution says we, the people, have a right to bear arms. I'm against a "nanny state" mentality where the government gets decide which arms are allowed to the "regular citizen" and which arms aren't.
I would have thought that those people against a fascist state would recognize that restricting and then eliminating gun ownership is one of the easiest ways to put the people at the mercy of the government.
Reply-
Neutral
Bkumm1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
No, the Constitution says specifically that:
"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."
Are you part of a well regulated militia?
Furthermore, that isn't the point. The point is limiting some gun ownership, not all. If you can give me a valid reason for someone to own a non-registered automatic capable assault rifle, with an extended magazine and armor piercing ammo, I'd love to hear it.
Reply-
Neutral
walden31 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Just as you can't yell fire in a crowded theater there can be reasonable restrictions on firearms. I agree with background checks. I don't like licensing because then there are lists of who owns what, which makes it easier for the government to seize the arms when you need them most like in New Orleans.
The question of whether the right is an individual right or a collective right is being sorted out as we speak by SCOTUS. I believe it to be an individual right otherwise the First Amendment would read, 'the right of militia members to own arms' or 'only militia members may bear arms.'
Read it as it's written, "...the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed" or do you read it that "the right of the people" only refers to militia members?
The only thing that makes a semi-auto an assault weapon is cosmetics. They look scary.
Worry about the bad guys who don't care whether or not there's a law on the books.
Reply-
Neutral
Radiofreeeuropa1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Gun control is tough one. There should be no problem with background checks. Beyond that I firmly believe any outlawing of weapons just makes millionaires in the black market happy.
Criminals who want weapons for crimes will always be able to get them. You'd only be regulating sportsmen and other law abiders. Democrats would likely double their ranks if they got off the gun control issue. Jefferson actually made comments that the second amendment was to force government to do the will of the people or be overthrown.
Reply-
baddad59Comment removed: Retracted by user23 Replies
-
-
Neutral
Bkumm1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
And if we read it as written:
"A well regulated militia..."
Everyone seems to leave that first part out of the equation. A militia that is "well regulated" would have gun inspections (to ensure operation), regular training and meetings.
Me, my neighbor and my uncle Bob do not a "well regulated" militia make.
I own an assault rifles, I'm well aware of the differences. I still don't see why I need one. I bought one right before the Brady Bill went into effect as an investment.
Reply-
AtheismIsRealityComment removed: Retracted by user7 Replies
-
Neutral
nostalgia1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Some of the statements/questions from the justices give some insight into their thinking on the militia question
"The two clauses go together beautifully: Since we need a militia, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed," said Justice Antonin Scalia
Chief Justice John Roberts scoffed at the D.C. ban's sweeping restrictions. "What is reasonable about a total ban on possession?" he asked. Justice Samuel Alito joined his colleagues, pointing out that the ban's provision â;; that legal rifles or shotguns be kept unloaded, with the trigger locked â;; neutralized its self-defense purposes. If an intruder materialized, he asked, could the weapon be readied in time? Both he and Justice Clarence Thomas appear certain to embrace the individual rights argument.
Reply-
Neutral
nostalgia1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Anthony Kennedy: he decoupled its two clauses, arguing that the state's right to maintain a militia did not imply that individuals did not also have a right to defend themselves in their homes. "The amendment says we reaffirm the right to have a militia," Kennedy said, "but in addition, there is a right to bear arms." Kennedy's crucial swing vote would tip the scales in favor of an individual right to bear arms.
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,...
Reply
-
-
Neutral
NoWayMan1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
yes. "well-regulated" is the phrase the talking heads continue to ignore. you need official training, periodic vehicle testing and an official license to drive a car. and everyone sees the wisdom in that. why not to own or use a gun?
and there's definitely no reason to own 1000 assault rifles.
yet the NRA thinks it is unreasonable for anyone to think owning 1000 asault rifles is unreasonable.
Reply-
-
-
mntnman444Comment removed: Spammer, Hard Banned2 Replies
-
-
Neutral
jordan111 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
There is no such thing as an assault weapon unless you include all weapons, knives, forks, ball bats, ball point pens etc..>>>>
Semantics, and just a tad disengenuous. Deflecting from the reality of an assault rifle vs a ball point pen isn't going to work, & degrades the argument.
Reply
-
-
-
-
ScrimshawComment removed: Retracted by user
-
-
-
ScrimshawComment removed: Retracted by user
-
-
-
mntnman444Comment removed: Spammer, Hard Banned2 Replies
-
-
Neutral
joeblowe1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
What difference if I'm in a militia? What if that sentence had read: "A well ripened banana, being yellow, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed?" The REASONING behind that right is not important. The absolute statement in the last half of that sentence doesn't depend on the first half. "the right of the people to keep and bear arms, SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED." My emphasis. SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED. Period. Doesn't SAY that I have to be in the militia. Doesn't SAY that I can't have an "assault" weapon. What it DOES say is that my right to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.
Reply
-
-
Neutral
walden31 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
SOM writes, "I'm against a "nanny state" mentality where the government gets decide..."
Then are you in against the government getting between tough decisions that women and their physicians need to make?
Then are you against the government deciding who can and cannot get married?
Then are you against the government deciding what material adults can legally ingest?
Then are you against the government deciding whether women can sell their bodies?
Then are you against the government deciding who can and cannot run a gambling racket?
Reply-
Neutral
Cheryl41 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Good points, Walden.
But I'd bet any money that 98% of these gun-toting radicals who defend their rights to carry, conceal and shoot, don't believe in defending all the previous rights we've had under the Constitution, including women's right to terminate a pregnancy. One only needs to see how the Supreme Court is stacked to know that the Republicans are turning our Constitution into nothing more than toilet paper.
Reply -
-
-
-
raats6662Comment removed: Retracted by user
-
raats6662Comment removed: Retracted by user
-
-
Neutral
Natureboy1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"But if you can show me a legitimate reason why a regular citizen should own an assault weapon with armor piercing rounds and an extended clip, I'd love to see it."
How about fear of a government gone fascist, and a police force drunk with power?
Reply-
-
-
Neutral
Bkumm1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
My point is that you, by yourself, couldn't do a thing. Let's say that a couple of crooked cops came to your house and demanded money or they would arrest you. What are you going to do? Shoot them? Then what? Pay the money? Then what? Resist arrest? Then what?
Think it through. The only way we are going to solve the problem will not involve weapons, at least in the initial stages. It can't.
Reply
-
-
-
-
Neutral
amazed1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
((but if you can show me a legitimate reason why a regular citizen should own an assault weapon with armor piercing rounds and an extended clip, I'd love to see it. ))
perhaps to protect themselves from an overreaching government -- or just to keep that gov't on alert that the citenzry is not harmless?
Reply-
Neutral
Bkumm1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
We are harmless. We can't get our government to do anything about 1.5 illegal immigrants per year when 80% of the population agrees that something needs to be done. Have you seen any marching in the street AK's held high over the issue? I haven't. And that is a major security and economic issue.
Now, I'm certainly not advocating that approach, but that kind of thing is indicative of how unresponsive our government has become. Do you want to see revolution every time we think the government is wrong or when X group gets in and Y group thinks they shouldn't? Have you SEEN Kenya these days?
Reply
-
-
-
-
-
Neutral
Lurch1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
>I do think that gun control is a weak link in for the Democratic Party. Many, many, many people vote Republican because of the Democrats' position of weakening gun rights.
80% of Americans want some form of gun control. The Dems just need to play as dirty as the Reps on this one and start attacking the gun crime enablers individually, like the cons do.
At least til the cons stop the fear-mongering and lies and agree to sit down at the table and negotiate like adults. Every NRA member is a gun-control advocate if you scratch the BS off their top epidermal layer. None of them think every American should have access to tanks, rpgs, nukes, etc.
Reply
-
-
-
-
AlphaGnosisComment removed: Hard Banned2 Replies
-
-
JohnQPublicComment removed: Retracted by user6 Replies
-
Neutral
engineer1 year, 8 months ago
-
ranchhandComment removed: Retracted by user16 Replies
-
-
mntnman444Comment removed: Spammer, Hard Banned1 Reply
-
Neutral
Poulenc1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
It's hard for me to understand how ANY woman could vote for a pol who wants to overturn R. Vs. W.
By doing so, that person is saying, I'm willing to give the government the ownership of my body.
Would men stand for ceding reproductive control, in as much as it concerns the use of their bodies, to the state?
The answer is no.
Reply-
-
-
Neutral
amazed1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
now, I really don't want to see early abortions illegal -- mainly because of my ambivalence, but exactly how is it celebrating the "dignity of every human being" to be out there screwing around without protection and/or killing fetuses (feti?) that are unambiguously human. (yes, they are -- there is no question of what an embryo or fetus in a woman's uterus will grow into -- no chance of a monkey or a dog or cat, etc.)
Again, I wouldn't support making all abortions illegal, but truly on this one, the pro-lifers do have better, more reasoned arguments than the pro-choicers-- whose arguements just kind of come off like a bunch of spoiled brats -- but I don't WANT to be preggers, so you can't make me ==nyah, nyah.
Reply-
mntnman444Comment removed: Spammer, Hard Banned2 Replies
-
-
-
raats6662Comment removed: Retracted by user
-
-
rdy2rckComment removed: Hard Banned13 Replies
-
-
mntnman444Comment removed: Spammer, Hard Banned
-
Neutral
Bkumm1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Hey, I give the guy all the respect in the world for being a POW. That would test the courage and conviction of any person. I wonder, however, just how much those on the Republican side know about this guy and how much they would like him if they did.
Further, I was informed by the usual suspects that I needed a John McCain thread to talk about John McCain.
Reply
-
-
Neutral
not2needy1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
As i have said a thousand times on here, i have family and friends that are republican. I don't see any of them cross a party line regardless if it meant their children would die in Iraq, none of them.
Apparently they like paying 4$ a gallon for gas, which snowballs into paying higher prices for everything else in the long run. Many of them can't afford this any more than the rest of us, but their politics is clearly more important than eating.
John McCain is already showing symptoms of confusion, from the speech he made the other day about the Irani's and Iraqi's, he didn't even appear to know the difference. So like Nancy Reagan, i guess Cindy McCain will end up being our president, and the most important thing in the country will be the china pattern for the WH, AGAIN!
Reply-
Neutral
Bkumm1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Now, come on, needy, I don't want you to hold back on this. I want you to really tell us how you feel about it!!
I think Senator McCain used to be a genuine guy until he lost to the Rove machine in 2000. A loss like that can change a man and that one did.
Reply-
Neutral
not2needy1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Actually Bk, i think he was a genuine guy until he made the statement about thinking that torture of detainees was wrong, then after Bush/Cheney and probably Rove took him aside, he's been a different man ever since. He lost credibility and he continues to lose it every time he opens his mouth.
Hence, the best thing for him to do is just stfu! lol
Reply-
-
mntnman444Comment removed: Spammer, Hard Banned1 Reply
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
ScrimshawComment removed: Retracted by user
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Neutral
icono11 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Try:
http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/c2008/cbarchive...
Reply -
ScrimshawComment removed: Retracted by user
-
-
-
Neutral
Will13131 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
how can one formulate foriegn policy.. when you don't know who the players are..
so funny Lieberman correcting him...
Emily Litela moment.. "never mind"..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fWf7w--TwyU
Reply-
ScrimshawComment removed: Retracted by user
-
-
Neutral
buckheadd1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
YES YES YES! MCAIN=Bush in disguise! MORE WAR,ANOTHER REPUBLICAN, and He looks like a combination of Dick Cheney and Bush:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/t...
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/t...
I know its hard to visualize it, but I think you can make the comparison.
BUCKHEADD FOR PRESIDENT 2008!
Reply -
Neutral
texangelwings1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
McCain has change over the past few years!
The little ha ha that he had when singing his song; "Bomb.....Iran" was not Presidential, in my mind! I have had enough of a snickering President when it comes to our soldiers having to fight in a war that was wrong.
He has become too willing to change his mind to fit other peoples opinions, rather than using his own judgement. I appreciate his service to our country and I mean him no disrespect. He isn't listening to the we the people!
Thanks BK!
Reply-
raats6662Comment removed: Retracted by user
-
-
Neutral
icono11 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I find it interesting that McCain is the best that the RNC can come up with to go against the talented Democratic contenders that are now slugging it out for their party's nomination.
I was also double shocked that Romney dropped out and practically handed the nomination to McCain on a silver platter. (truly for me a WTF moment)
IMHO, I'm starting to think that with the democratic party apparently tearing itself apart with the Clinton vs OBama drama the Republicans are starting to count their 'chickens before they hatch' or they know something about the up coming election we the people don't. (Maybe more of the Florida chad is in the future with the with the Supreme Court deciding the final outcome. AGAIN!!!!!)
But to be sure McCain is not clean, for you cannot be part of the American political machine and not have some 'dirt' someplace to either further your career or be used as political blackmail against you.
Reply -
AtheismIsRealityComment removed: Retracted by user1 Reply
-
Neutral
nostalgia1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Bkumm
You mentioned 2 very difficult issues - Social Security and Medicare
I don't think either will be addressed since this is an election year
Frankly, I don't think anyone in national politics has the courage to stand up and address these issues.
Both are only going to get worse as more baby boomers retire
If something is not done soon, both will collapse
Reply-
Neutral
Bkumm1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Agreed, that both will collapse. However, Senator McCain's plan of bait and switch, while sounding good to the average Joe voter, simply won't work.
Somebody better have courage to face up to it sooner or later. I wonder who it will be?
Reply-
Neutral
nostalgia1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I don't think anyone is willing to step up to the plate on this
Have you looked at your last statement - I received mine about 3 months ago. There is a statement: the benefits will be reduced by ~ 25% unless Congress acts
Whatever changes are made, SS funds need to be treated as a real trust fund and not used to mask the deficit
The system should have changed in 1990 when President Bush signed Section 13301 of the Budget Act, which prohibited either the President or Congress from reporting a budget using the Social Security trust funds.
This has been ignored by every President and Congress since then. They are still spending the surplus
I would sooner see private accounts that Congress cannot touch than allow them to keep spending the money and end up reducing the benefits.
Reply-
Neutral
jordan111 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
would sooner see private accounts that Congress cannot touch than allow them to keep spending the money and end up reducing the benefits.>>>>
In this risky economy, I wouldn't put a dime into long term growth. There is no safe place to go with money right now. And how many can afford a private account? How many would do it? What would happen to the boomers who paid for those before them? I'm really not trying to make light of what you're saying. I'm saying maybe there is no way to resolve this. Maybe raiding the surplus has made it impossible to fix. Funny, I have an appt. next month to sign up for medicare. If I don't, my state retirement health care plan will drop me. The state invested my money wisely, has billions in assets that the state can't touch. Too bad the feds didn't do the same.
Reply
-
-
-
-
Neutral
automan9091 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
When you talk about the second amendment don't leave out this line. "The right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." All you libs like to leave that line out.
The reason we need high capacity mags, and ar15 type weapons is when Obama or Hillary try to turn us into a socialist country we can take it back. Thankfully we have gun friendly McCain to save us from all of that. Besides...the bad guys have those weapons so why can't the good guys be able to protect themselves?
Reply-
Neutral
Natureboy1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"When Obama or Hillary try to turn us into a socialist country we can take it back."
A real knee-slapper. Both are in the hip pockets of big business. They are not looking to bring the revolution, they are seeking to preside over the status quo.
Reply -
Neutral
donald511 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Auto, amazing how scared you are of taking care of fellow Americans a little... and then to call it "sociolism" to boot! Haven't you seen enough of not regulating business at all under Dumya to realize that some regulation to protect all Americans is necessary? Greed versus some minimal care for all Americans... how incompassionate you are! How Un-Christian too!
Reply
-
-
Neutral
svensun1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The problem I have with this clownishly amateurish 'article' is that it makes McCain sound TOO GOOD!
The simple truth is that McCain is NOWHERE NEAR AS CONSERVATIVE as the 'author' makes him out to be; McCain is wobbly when it comes to gun rights, inconsistent on the protection of the unborn, has a suspect track record on tax reductions, in 2000 denounced Christian conservatives as 'agents of intolerance' and called for their 'elimination' from the GOP, and has been AWOL in the fight to stop the Ponzi scheme otherwise known as 'Social Security' that Dems have been cruelly foisting upon America's futures generations for decades.
I know that McCain is not as conservative as this propagandist tries to make him out, because if he was, I WOULD HAVE SUPPORTED HIM FOR THE GOP NOMINATION!
Reply -
Neutral
svensun1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The reality is that, apart from the War on Islamofascism, it is not easy to predict how McCain will proceed with many important issues near and dear to conservatives, and it is stretching credulity to portray McCain as some sort of latter-day Barry Goldwater. That is nonsensical.
Reply -
Neutral
NoWayMan1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
you mean John McCain?
the guy who doesn't even know if Iran is sunni or shia?
the guy who said he's willing to stay in Iraq for 100 years?
the guy who was against the Bush tax cuts until he was for them?
the guy who broke his own FEC laws?
the guy who criticized Rev. Hagee for his hateful comments about the catholic church but said nothing about Hagee's hateful comments concerning women, muslims, homosexuals, etc.?
that guy?
Reply -
-
HMMaceComment removed: Spammer, Hard Banned
-
Neutral
k21bl1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
If you think it's bad now you haven't seen anything if McCain gets elected!!!! I can't believe people are stupid enough to vote for him. He is exactly like his butt buddy Georgie Boy!!!! Mr. Intelligent!!!!!! All you people with children of military age beware if he gets to be President your children will be fighting in IRAN!!!!!!!
Reply -
Neutral
vor1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"I'm John McCain. think of me as the new Bob Dole. They couldn't settle on anybody so they picked the oldest one. I have experience (been a Washington good ol' boy for a long time) and I have licked enough boots over the years to get the nod. I'm a former POW afterall, not some medal grubbing Swift Boat flunkie like that shmuck Kerry. I won't really have to run a campaign. Just let the GOP fear machine go to work. Hell, it got GW elected, twice!. This time we'll either get racist or sexist along with the scare tactics. How can we lose? That will steer the sheep in the right direction. Then it's bomb, bomb, bomb, Iran! Maybe I'll keep Dick around the White House or just let him run things from his "undisclosed locations". One of us is going to die soon and something tells me that old coot is just too gloriously evil to go before me. But for now me and my Stepford wife are going to be Prez and First Lady. Can you believe it?"
Reply -
Neutral
slate1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The McCain Camp: The latest thing tossing Boeing under the bus and then the lobbyist working for him, the Keating 5 Scandal, the free jet service, adultery, and hearing hateful things from a preacher.
Why vote for him? Let's see because he's White? Maybe because he's a tab bit more conservative than the other two candidates? Maybe the thought of any liberal Democrat in office will make you vote for even McCain?
Reply-
Neutral
slate1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The Obama Camp: Listened to anti-American, Anti-Jew and Anti-American hate from his personal preacher. He threw his grandma under the bus because she's white, called one of his white female family members a 'typical' white woman. Try and use that phrase and replace the word white with black sometime. Throw in the guy that helped him buy the property next door.
Why vote for him? Let's see because he talks nice about unity but when you look deeper he has listened to just the opposite message for a couple of decades. Let's see, because he's an African Man an in will make you feel better and the world proud that we have 'finally' grown up? He voted against the war? Maybe because anyone is better than another Republican and anyone is better than the thought of that happening again?
Reply-
Neutral
slate1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The Clinton Camp: Actually was the camp that injected race into the primaries, not once, not twice, not three but four times. Stolen FBI files against Republican, I won't list all her scandals they are to numerous, we all know the accusations. She voted for the War and now says she's against it. She assumed she would be the Queen of the party and turned as nasty as a wounded wolverine once she found out a good looking, smooth talking man that was relatively unknown cleaned her clock. Poetic Justice?
Why vote for her? She and Obama would be identical when it comes to taxes, domestic and foreign affairs. Let's see, because he's a woman an in will make you feel better and the world proud that we have 'finally' grown up? She will really really stick to rich people if you just put her in? Maybe because anyone is better than another Republican and anyone is better than the thought of that happening again?
Reply -
-
-
-
-
Neutral
abercrombieackerman1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Actually every national of the United States of America has got the RIGHT(note, not privilege) to own and use an AK-47 or larger assault rifle.
I can't stand the liberal McCain, however
read the CONSTITUTION and you will see that the second amendment is NOT for hunting or collecting guns.
It's there, so that each and every one of us can protect our liberties from the government and other individuals who pose harm to us or our property.
THE BILL OF RIGHTS acknowledges this right very clearly.
McCain is less conservative than Hillary Clinton.
Obama will get us more war, Hillary will get us more war,
McCain will get us more war. CHECK THEIR VOTING HISTORY!
What will Obama, Hillary and McCain do to fix the dollar?!?!? NOTHING.
Reply -
Neutral
Amanda_Krown1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
John Mccain become like Eliot Spitzer? )))
heh. watch nore here scandal video here: Mccain with Prostitute !!
http://usa-top-news.info/Scandals/John_Mccain_w...
Reply -
-
Neutral
chiefexecutivedomesinc1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
a couple of posts id like to respond to forgive what may be a somewhat inexact quote ? " what if the VT shooter had had two 100 rd mags and armor piercing bullets?" What difference would ap bullets have made ? im assuming this VT shooting is yet anothe school shooting one can hardly keep up ? unless and if this was another school shooting unless you send your kid to school with a flak jacket on what would ap bullets have to do with anything ?the other post says what need has a "regular" citizen with assault rifles ? just exactly what is a "regular" citizen nowadays? And what might have constituted a " regular " citizen 230 years ago at the outset of the american revolution ?
Reply-
raats6662Comment removed: Retracted by user
-
-
Neutral
Dblog1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Watch Bush and Cheney try to arrange a 10 year US commitment in Iraq, so no one can end the war, they are already doing that now. Bush is not done yet - damaging the US economy and putting us in debt for the next 100 years along with McCain.
Reply -
loading ...
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.