Democrats & Liberals Archives

Straight-Talking McCain

Senator John McCain boasts being a man of integrity, a man of principles, a straight talker. You may not agree with him on some issues but he is consistent and you can depend on him. I used to think so too a long time ago. But in recent years as he has been lusting after the presidency, he has changed his position on many issues.

McCain hated George W. Bush because of the nasty and underhanded way Bush beat him in the South Carolina primaries in 2000 with false innuendos. He disdained Bush until he realized he may need his help in gaining the presidency. Now you see the two of them in a locked embrace.

In 1999 McCain said he would not support the overturn of Roe vs. Wade. Now he does. He once criticized Jerry Falwell as intolerant. Now he cozies up to him. He was definitely against torture. Now he hems and haws. There is a lot more.

But the most distressing flip-flop is about campaign finance reform. A long time ago he and Senator Feingold got the McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform bill passed. Since then he has lost interest in it. And now he is suddenly interested again. He challenged Obama to agree now to public financing of his general election campaign, should he win the Democratic nomination. Obama retorted that he will negotiate the matter, if and when he wins the nomination. Not good enough for McCain. He continues to press the issue.

Now we find out why McCain is so interested again in campaign finance reform:

John McCain's cash-strapped campaign borrowed $1 million from a Bethesda bank two weeks before the New Hampshire primary by pledging to enter the public financing system if his bid for the presidency faltered, newly disclosed records show.

Yes, indeed, a straight talker. He smiles every time he flip-flops on TV. This is a form of assurance that he is dependable. Yes, indeed, dependable until he finds a reason to change.

Posted by Paul Siegel at February 18, 2008 3:25 PM
Comments
Comment #245641

Did Jerry Falwell rise from the dead? I’ll have to go back into my old rhetoric on the Church of I Hate You.

And Bush not only embraced McCain, but kissed him as well, and maybe he will do more to stay on the right side of a guy that should be sending him to The Hague next year.

Posted by: ohrealy at February 18, 2008 5:22 PM
Comment #245660

Well, I’ve said that all Barack Hussein Obama has is nothing but rhetoric. I was wrong. Apparently, HE DOESN’T EVEN HAVE THAT!

Posted by: Duane-o at February 18, 2008 9:00 PM
Comment #245664

Jeez Duane-o its only February and your in panic mode. Thats much ado about nothing, why bother when the post is about McCain?

Posted by: j2t2 at February 18, 2008 9:15 PM
Comment #245671

Yes, I’ll admit I’m panicking at the thought of a Barack Hussein Obama presidency. It seems like the whole country is caught up in all this Husseinamania, most not knowing his positions on the issues, just blindly following the crowd. I fear this guy could do real damage to this country that I love so much. I know, “How much more damage can he do than Dubya blah blah blah.” Let us not forget when Germany, facing economic crisis and an unpopular government, got caught up in the rhetoric of a charismatic young politician proclaiming himself the voice of a new generation.

Posted by: Duane-o at February 18, 2008 10:12 PM
Comment #245676

Paul
I agree. Back in 2005 or so my dream ticket would have been McCain-Romney. Back then they bothed seemed like moderates, republicans that could win over some dems. I didn’t like McCain’s Iraq stance much or Romney’s business ties, but I liked them. That was before they started kissing up to the Religious Wrong. Now I support Obama. And it seems to me that anyone not wearing Bibles for blinders could see that calling Jerry Falwell/Pat Robertson agents of intolerance is an understatement.

Duane-o
Do you really think anyone who cares enough about politics to read here will care that Barack Obama’s middle name happens to be Hussein? Its really a fairly common name. Its if I ran for office and an atheist refused to vote for me cause my middle name is James. (Jesus’ brother)

Also, Adolf Hitler was a megalomaniacal war-monger. Ever notice how much Obama uses “we?” Doesn’t sound like a megalomaniac. And he opposed the Iraq War. Not exactly a war-monger.

Posted by: Silima at February 18, 2008 11:08 PM
Comment #245681

Silima,

Not to suggest what Duane-o is suggesting, but Hitler was not seen as a megalomaniacal war-monger when he gained office. He was seen as the guy who could unite Germany and bring them out of the oppression they were experiencing. You make it sound as if the German people knew what they were putting into office and wanted it, when the reality is much different and a good lesson to learn.

Posted by: Rhinehold at February 19, 2008 12:01 AM
Comment #245683

If McCain keeps his word on the public financing, it would make Obama look really bad if he does not follow suit. On the Sunday shows, they were saying Obama will just direct his contributors to the party, and they can buy the ads for him.

Posted by: ohrealy at February 19, 2008 12:27 AM
Comment #245689

Duane-o
Lets see now.Eliminating tax incentives for companies to move jobs overseas and adding incentives for companies that create jobs here.Damn.How could the country possibly survive that? Forgiveing student loans for people that volunteer for public service,like the peace corps or working in shelters,tutoring poor kids etc. MY GOD! What is the country comming to!
Talk about knowing little of Obamas policies some more,why don’t you.

Posted by: BillS at February 19, 2008 1:35 AM
Comment #245690

ohrealy,

McCain has now been exposed as a complete hypocrite on the entire campaign finance issue
(among others). After what he has done - taking tons of PAC and special interest money, and now with the fact that he’s been caught out gaming the public financing system during the primary and also trying to beat up on Barack Obama before the man has even won the Democratic nomination, McCain has only made himself look bad.
In fact, Very Bad.

Oh and btw, now “Maverick” McCain has got Bush’s Bundlers: “the Rangers and Pioneers” on board too.
I’m serious. Check it out:
McCain Signs Up a Bush Fund-Raising Organizer

And just so no one blows right past this sentence, I’ll blockquote it:

Mr. McCain’s advisers said that the candidate, despite his signature legislative efforts to restrict the money spent on political campaigns, would not accept public financing and spending limits for this year’s general campaign.

Hypocrisy thy name is McCain.

Posted by: veritas vincit at February 19, 2008 1:41 AM
Comment #245692

There remains a bottom line about campaign financing and that is simply do you want publicly financed campaigns with there inherent spending limits or not. Both Obama and McCain have promised to abide by the rules set up before the race. McCain is keeping his word. Obama may do so, but is waffling.

It makes absolutely no difference to the discussion at hand where the original campaign money came from. Money is fungible. I do not know who had the money in my wallet before I did and it makes no difference.

It also makes no difference to the discussion WHY the candidates take the positions on public financing of this campaign. If you believe in public financing of campaigns and limits on spending, then you believe in these things. Dissecting the motives is as useful as accusing someone of obeying the speed limit just because he doesn’t want to get a ticket. It matters only that he is obeying the speed limit. You need not look into his heart to see if he likes the speed limit.

The Obama camp is now using such an amazingly cynical and self serving argument, I almost think their opponents (maybe Hillary) put them up to it. Let me summarize what many of YOU have said.

Obama cannot be expected to abide by his promises and the publicly funded campaign rules because he has managed to raise more money than his opponents. Sort of like the speed limit example. A guy buys a new BMW and says that speed limits should not apply to him because he has an expensive new fast car.

I am still hoping that Obama is a more honest man than his supporters think he is and that he will keep his word. It would be better to have a race between two candidates with integrity.

Posted by: Jack at February 19, 2008 2:48 AM
Comment #245696

Jack
Did you miss what VV had to contribute?

Mr. McCain’s advisers said that the candidate, despite his signature legislative efforts to restrict the money spent on political campaigns, would not accept public financing and spending limits for this year’s general campaign.

The whole basis for you back handed attack just went poof.

Posted by: BillS at February 19, 2008 7:24 AM
Comment #245697

Jack-
Please accept that McCain has no basis whatsoever to come down on Obama. He’s up to his eyeballs in special interest money, and apparently he was going to use public funds, if he did, not to run a general campaign, but to cover his financial losses if he didn’t make the nomination.

Duane-O:
Please accept that it’s not plagiarism if the author gives you permission to use their words. If using other’s words when they’re fine with it was plagiarism, then the Republican party would have all the integrity in this matter of a video piracy outfit. I mean, If I hear a talking point from one Republican, I know I will here it from every GOP support, their dog, and their pet hamster by the time the day is done.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at February 19, 2008 8:18 AM
Comment #245698

Jack

I am still hoping that Obama is a more honest man than his supporters think he is and that he will keep his word. It would be better to have a race between two candidates with integrity.

It seems Obama has not as yet ruled out public financing. However McCain’s advisors are officially stateing that he will not be using the public financing system. So I guess by your logic this mean that McCain can no longer be considered a man of integrity.

Posted by: RickIL at February 19, 2008 8:31 AM
Comment #245708
Hitler was not seen as a megalomaniacal war-monger when he gained office.

The German people were incredibly deluded then. In the two volumes of Mein Kampf, he clearly laid out plans to conquer Europe.

Posted by: Woody Mena at February 19, 2008 10:40 AM
Comment #245719

Yes, Woody, they were deluded, the Depression and oppressive costs applied to them by the Treaty of Versailles allowed people to be led down the wrong path. They were looking for ‘change’.

It is not an unfamiliar story and one that people should learn from, but we see it repeated over and over again…

As for ‘conquering Europe’, you have to remember that Germany lost a lot of land after WWI that many still felt belonged to them, it is not hard to see how that could be coached into getting it back by force if necessary…

Posted by: Rhinehold at February 19, 2008 12:50 PM
Comment #245725

2 reasons to NOT vote for McCain.

1. Bomb, Bomb Iran
2. his statement about being in Iraq for 100 yrs.

How can we possibly believe we can improve our economy while we continue to spend money (that we don’t have and are borrowing)on Iraq.

Posted by: Carolina at February 19, 2008 2:06 PM
Comment #245726

More on McCain

At one point and time, I thought that if the democrats lost in 2008 and we were stuck again with a repub. that I could live with McCain. but no longer. The man obviously is so interested in being president which has nothing to do with doing whats best for the country that he will sell his soul. He has changed his opinion so much that I am being to think he has multiply personality disorder and that another personality has taken over.

I am suspicous of all politicans-Barack included but I do think there is a scale from just really evil and bad to not to bad-McCain with all his flip-floping has clearly sold out and to me appears not to care for whats best for the country but only cares about what is best for McCain and his desire to be president.


Posted by: Carolina at February 19, 2008 2:16 PM
Comment #245730

2 reasons to NOT vote for McCain.

1. Bomb, Bomb Iran
2. his statement about being in Iraq for 100 yrs.

Posted by: Duane-o at February 19, 2008 3:00 PM
Comment #245731

2 reasons to NOT vote for McCain.

1. Bomb, Bomb Iran
2. his statement about being in Iraq for 100 yrs.

How can we possibly believe we can improve our economy while we continue to spend money (that we don’t have and are borrowing)on Iraq entitlements.

Posted by: Duane-o at February 19, 2008 3:05 PM
Comment #245732

Federal Campaign Donations:

  • Candidate’s ___ # $200+ _ %Donors __ # $2,300+ _ %Donors _ # $4,600 _ %Donors

  • Name: ________ Donors __ upto $200 _ Donors ____ $2300+ __ Donors ___ $4,600

  • ________________ ________ ___________ __________ _________ ________ _______
  • Clinton, Hillary ___ 57,975 ___ 12% ___ 19,949 _____ 63% _____ 7,411 ______ 33%

  • Obama, Barack __ 69,628 ___ 26% ___ 16,259 _____ 43% _____ 1,964 ______ 10%

  • McCain, John ____ 27,205 ___ 22% ____ 6,183 _____ 45% ______ 731 _______ 9%
  • John McCain doesn’t have a chance, unless voter sentiments change drastically between now and 4-NOV-2008, because:

    • (1) most voter donations (of all sizes) are not going to John McCain.

    • (2) Most (vastly more) of the largest donations (of $4,600) are going to to BOTH Democrat candidates, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.

    • (3) John McCain’s share of the $4,600 donations is a tiny 7.8%

    • (4) John McCain’s share of the $2,300+ donations is a tiny 14.6%

    • (5) John McCain’s share of the smaller $200 (or less) donations is only 17.6%

    • (6) John McCain has alienated many conservatives on many issues (e.g. illegal immigration, McCain-Feingold campaign finance, Iraq, taxation, economic issues, etc.)

    While John McCain might get the Republican nomination, and there are almost 9 months to go, John McCain’s chances of winning the election are dismal.
    And many Republicans that do vote for John McCain will be holding their nose when they do it.
    Many are likely to stay home and not vote at all.
    So, there doesn’t seem to be much reason to worry about John McCain.

    What is also interesting about the numbers above is that while Hillary Clinton has the most money and the largest number (by far) of the wealthiest donors (i.e. many more $4,600 donors than everyone else combined), while Obama has 5% more of the smaller donors ($200 or less), Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are almost tied for delegates?

    What is this telling us?
    The wealthiest donors like Hillary Clinton better.
    The less wealthy (and more numerous) donors like Barack Obama better.

    Since 90% of elections are won by the candidate that spends the most money, what does it say about Hillary Clinton when she has lost her vast lead and is now only tied with Barack Obama?

    But, since 90% of elections are won by the candidate that spends the most money, we shouldn’t count Hillary Clinton out yet, because the 99.85% of a all 200 million eligible voters that are vastly out-spent by a very tiny 0.15% of the wealthiest 200 million eligible voters that make 83% of all federal campaign donations (of $200 or more), may still be convinced to vote for Hillary?

    But, perhaps this election will be different?
    Perhaps money will not be the deciding factor?
    Perhaps this will be one election where 99.85% of all 200 million eligible voters, that are vastly out-spent by a very tiny 0.15% of all voters that abuse vast wealth to influence and control government (i.e. making 83% of all federal campaign donations of $200 or more) are upset?

    However, regradless of who the next president is, the next president won’t be able to accomplish much (if anything) if the voters saddle the next president with the same FOR-SALE, irresponsible, corrupt, Do-Nothing Congress, who refuse to stop these 10+ abuses growing in number and severity over the last 30 years? Abuses that did not all come about by mere coincidence.

    Posted by: d.a.n at February 19, 2008 3:23 PM
    Comment #245739

    “Ever notice how much Obama uses “we?” Doesn’t sound like a megalomaniac.”

    You need to go back and check out Hitler’s speeches and look for the word “we”. Hitler used it almost exclusively. He may have been a megalomaniac (there are lots of reasons to suspect megalomania from BHO as well), but he was still a good politician.

    Posted by: Duane-o at February 19, 2008 4:32 PM
    Comment #245741

    Let’s put VV’s little deception in context.

    Mr. McCain’s advisers said that the candidate, despite his signature legislative efforts to restrict the money spent on political campaigns, would not accept public financing and spending limits for this year’s general campaign. But in 2007, Mr. McCain did agree to a nonaggression pact with Senator Barack Obama to accept public financing, about $85 million each for the general election, if the Democratic nominee did the same. Mr. Obama, who is raising money at a rate of $1 million a day, has since said he will not use public financing for the fall campaign.

    This story is from last Tuesday, when it seemed more likely that Hillary, who would never go for public financing, would be the candidate. Now that it’s Obama, public financing is back on the table for McCain. Quoting old news out of context doesn’t help your case.

    Posted by: Duane-o at February 19, 2008 4:39 PM
    Comment #245744

    Duane-O

    That was so cute what you did with my post! It was very impressive.

    Doesn’t change anything. You think what you want-I’ll think what I want. all we have to do is look at the mess made by Bush to know what kind of mess Mccain will continue.

    I am wondering if you are in the military? Ever been to Iraq? Old enough to go? My guess is probably not. It is so easy to send young men and women to die for nothing when it isn’t you that is going.

    Also, the amount spent on entitlements doesn’t come close to the amount spent on this war.

    Posted by: Carolina at February 19, 2008 4:53 PM
    Comment #245747

    Carolina

    “I am wondering if you are in the military? Ever been to Iraq? Old enough to go? My guess is probably not. It is so easy to send young men and women to die for nothing when it isn’t you that is going.”

    it would also be easy to say that those of you who say you support the troops, but not the mission, would not go regaurdless of the mission, support it or not. it would also be just as silly.

    making those types of accusations doesn’t help you rcredibility, especially when you don’t actually know the answer. i filled out my draft reg. form on my 18th b-day many years ago. how many young men who oppose this war can say they’ve done thier duty, and also filled out that same form, which is required by law.

    Posted by: dbs at February 19, 2008 5:07 PM
    Comment #245752
    Yes, Woody, they were deluded, the Depression and oppressive costs applied to them by the Treaty of Versailles allowed people to be led down the wrong path. They were looking for ‘change’.

    It is not an unfamiliar story and one that people should learn from, but we see it repeated over and over again…

    I’m not sure what you are driving at here, Rhinehold. If you are suggesting that American politicians like Obama who advocate “change” are like Hitler, I’d have to say that’s a pretty silly comparison.

    Posted by: Woody Mena at February 19, 2008 5:52 PM
    Comment #245754

    dbs

    my credibility is just fine thank-you.

    “it would also be easy to say that those of you who say you support the troops, but not the mission, would not go regaurdless of the mission, support it or not. it would also be just as silly.” I reread this more than once but am unclear exactly what you are saying. I am not exactly sure what you are saying here. But let me try and respond to what I think you meant.

    I was a teenager and young adult during vietnam and being female meant I didn’t have to go. As you see I am too old for Iraq but you are right if i was young enough I would not go and if there was a draft I would be in Canada. But that isn’t my point. My point is I want the young men and women home today and I don’t want this war or any other war. I do think it is relevant to ask someone who is in favor of the war if they have served and if not why not?

    McCain wants to continue this war and extend it to Iran. I find that disgusting especially from a war hero and a prisoner of war. IMO to continue this war and consider making more war to gain political points with the right wing is immoral.

    Posted by: Carolina at February 19, 2008 6:11 PM
    Comment #245757

    I must admit to being somewhat dumb when it comes to money and financies. After reading all the posts, it seems simple enough: McCain wants Barack to agree to public financing because it will benefit him (McCain). It seems that some posters feel that when Barack says he will negotiate this: it means he is going back on his word. Ok lets just say for the sake of arguement that it does mean Barack will be going back on his word. Big deal-so ONE time Barack changes his mind or goes back on his word. One time against all the MANY times McCain has gone back on his word. I think I can live with those odds.

    Posted by: Carolina at February 19, 2008 6:31 PM
    Comment #245767

    “Big deal-so ONE time Barack changes his mind or goes back on his word. One time against all the MANY times McCain has gone back on his word. I think I can live with those odds.”

    But from your Messiah?

    Carolina, I have two dear cousins (more like brothers, having grown up together) who served in Iraq, the younger doing two tours. Both of them are Republican(like the overwhelming majority of U.S. Military) and both support the war and the surge(like the overwhelming majority of U.S. Military) I regret that I didn’t serve as I had planned because of “girlfriend” issues, although I did register with the selective service when I turned 18 and would not run to Canada like a lily livered jellyfish if the draft were reinstated. Now I have two kids and a wife(different girl), not to mention I’m too old. Did Bill Clinton have any right to send our boys to die in Somalia since he dodged the draft?

    Posted by: Duane-o at February 19, 2008 7:47 PM
    Comment #245770

    Carolina

    i’m sorry i wasn’t more clear. i do understand as a female you would not be subject the draft. i was a teenager myself towards the end of the vietnam war , and watched it on the tv news seems like every evening as a kid. while can respect that you don’t want to see young men and women die in combat, i don’t enjoy it either. my son-in-law just got out of the marine corps, my daughter served in the navy up until a couple years ago. many of thier friends are serving in afganistan, and served several tours in iraq. they are proud to serve, and believe in what they are doing. as far as your comment about going to canada, i find that statement troubling. many served in vietnam that didn’t want to go, but they did thier duty to thier country just the same. i have no sympathy for someone who runs away from thier duty when thier brothers are dying, only to save thier own skin. it is the duty of every man to serve if called, and we don’t get to pick and choose how and when. thats the way it is. i do appreciate your thoughtful response though.

    Posted by: dbs at February 19, 2008 8:31 PM
    Comment #245801

    Duane-o:

    Let’s put VV’s little deception in context.

    McCain is the deceiver here. Period.
    Because despite his earlier discussion with Obama about possibly going with public financing for the general, he had already decided that “despite his signature legislative efforts to restrict the money spent on political campaigns, would not accept public financing and spending limits for this year’s general campaign.” But, then the McCain campaign decided to attack Obama on this issue; attempting to imply that Obama’s possible future stance on this (he isn’t the Democratic nominee yet) had something to do with McCain’s decision.
    It’s nothing but hypocritical BS, that was designed to make Obama look bad. But true to what has quickly become his expected form, Obama didn’t fall for their game.

    This story is from last Tuesday

    Right. And their baseless attack on Obama came after Tuesday. After they had already decided NOT to accept public financing or spending limits.

    when it seemed more likely that Hillary, who would never go for public financing, would be the candidate.

    You clearly don’t know what you’re talking about. Hillary didn’t appear any more likely to win the nomination last Tuesday. In fact, Obama had just slaughtered the Clinton’s in the Potomac Primary the week before.

    Now that it’s Obama, public financing is back on the table for McCain.

    No, clearly it isn’t. Indeed, that’s why before their attack on Obama, they had gone ahead and hired Bush’s Bundler to start squeezing all the “Rangers and Pioneers.”

    Quoting old news out of context doesn’t help your case.

    Actually, it does. And your inability to grasp the importance of the timeline here doesn’t help McCain to appear as any less of a hypocrite and a scumbag — despite his years of (empty) rhetoric and (feigned) passion on this issue.

    Posted by: veritas vincit at February 20, 2008 12:36 AM
    Comment #245814

    The McCain defenders on this thread must feel a little silly with todays announcement that he raised 12 million last week. Gee,he seems to have dropped the issue like a hot potato all of a sudden.

    Posted by: BillS at February 20, 2008 4:22 AM
    Comment #245829

    Duane-o and dbs

    IMO Being sent to serve in an immoral, unjust war is not serving your country. I am sad for all the young men and women who don’t come back and ashamed that we would send them.

    Duane-o liver-lily jellyfish? whatever!! So you wouldn’t run to Canada but GIRLFRIEND issues kept you from going? That is very interesting.

    I have already voted in a primary and voted for John Edwards.

    Its funny how you guys always bring up Bill Clinton so is that like Bushie hiding behind daddy bush and not going to vietnam but being in favor of that war and more than happy to send other young men to their deaths. How is that different than going to Canada. A coward is a coward.

    So since people in the military are from your family and are in favor of all this that somehow makes it right even though the VAST majority of AMERICANS no longer agree.

    dbs I appreciate your more thoughtful post. Obviously we disagree on the idea of duty to our country. I want to see our young men and women come home. I want to see them give their lives for a truly noble cause and not senseless wars to make money for oil companies and the war machine that wants to stay in business. If more young men had gone to Canada instead of feeling that it was somehow their duty to go fight in vietnam then maybe it would have ended sooner and fewer men would have died. I don’t see it as cowardly to refuse to fight-giving up your life because someone else is giving up theirs saves no one-it just prolongs an already bad situation.

    Posted by: Carolina at February 20, 2008 7:52 AM
    Comment #245849

    Carolina

    i think a more effective, and courageous form of protest would have been for those opposed to stay and face prosecution, thereby overloading the justice system, and prisons. i also think it would have been more honorable, than running away. thats just my opinion though.

    Posted by: dbs at February 20, 2008 11:48 AM
    Comment #245881

    Right. And their baseless attack on Obama came after Tuesday. After they had already decided NOT to accept public financing or spending limits.”

    Do you watch the news?

    John McCain said just yesterday, right here in Columbus:We either keep our word or we don’t keep our word. I intend to keep my word to the American people,” McCain said Wednesday, pressing the line of criticism anew a day after delivering a blistering critique of the Illinois senator as both won their party primaries in Wisconsin.

    McCain is accepting public financing if Obama is willing to do the same.

    Posted by: Duane-o at February 20, 2008 4:59 PM
    Comment #245882

    McCain is a hypocrite if he goes back on his own campaign financing principles to get some money to pay tv networks to promote his candidacy, but nobody ever said the American people will not vote for a hypocrite.

    Why are D.A.N. and Jack making more sense than our side? Thanks to the d-man and the r-man for injecting a Hister discussion in the middle to make everyone else look better.

    On Obama V Clinton, she is ultimately going to have to give in to him, and the party will have to suck it up if McCain manages hold his temper for the rest of the year. Obama is still an unknown, and the media can easily turn him into the C-man.

    Posted by: ohrealy at February 20, 2008 5:00 PM
    Comment #245884

    “That’s Washington doublespeak,” McCain responded. “I committed to public financing. He committed to public financing. It’s not any more complicated than that. I’ll keep my word, and I want him to keep his.

    McCain’s taking the public financing. Please try to stay a little more informed. Don’t get your news from Veritas Vincent.

    Posted by: Duane-o at February 20, 2008 5:06 PM
    Comment #245913

    Duane-o:

    ”We either keep our word or we don’t keep our word. I intend to keep my word to the American people,” McCain said Wednesday,

    Except he already has taken PAC and special interest money, and has gamed the public financing system during the primary, so he’s a total hypocrite.

    pressing the line of criticism anew a day after delivering a blistering critique of the Illinois senator as both won their party primaries in Wisconsin.

    Pressing criticism when McCain is the one guilty of not making his actions match his rhetoric, and when Obama won that primary without having to take dirty money or game the system the way that he did.

    McCain is accepting public financing if Obama is willing to do the same.

    Yeah. IF Obama wins the Democratic nomination, maybe they can work something out. But it still doesn’t change the fact that McCain’s actions have shown that he doesn’t actually care about this issue at all.

    McCain’s taking the public financing.

    Only IF Obama wins and they can come to some agreement. But if Hillary wins, McCain has no intention of taking the public financing, since she obviously never had any intention of doing so (despite the fact that she jumped on McCain’s criticism bandwagon against Obama). So, if Hillary is the nominee, McCain is saying that taking a stand on the issue would be too much trouble for him. You might say he’s selectively very deeply concerned about campaign financing.

    Please try to stay a little more informed. Don’t get your news from Veritas Vincent.

    That’s veritas vincit - it’s latin.
    As for my news, it was to inform those reading this thread that McCain has made statements outlining different rules depending upon what week it happened to be — and now I suppose, depending upon which candidate he might be facing in the general. He’s a complete hypocrite (who already took dirty money and gamed the very system he’s supposed to be so “passionate” about) and is now trying to use the issue for baseless attacks. And he is doing this with the one Democratic candidate who FIRST RAISED THE ISSUE WITH HIM.
    Basically, McCain has showed how he’s just the typical Republican politician we’ve all come to expect: the kind of man who thinks his virtuous words are somehow more important than his crooked deeds.

    Posted by: veritas vincit at February 20, 2008 9:45 PM
    Comment #245925

    On possible Obama campaign songs, from Yes we can, I went to Mr. Brightside, then Tracy Chapman’s Change, this one is Coldplay’s Fix You:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jBEYyHGbwto

    I am looking for a better version of Bloc Party’s Pioneers:
    If it can be broke then it can be fixed,
    if it can be fused then it can be split
    It’s all under control
    If it can be lost then it can be won,
    if it can be touched then it can be turned
    All you need is time
    We promised the world we’d tame it, what were we hoping for?
    A sense of purpose and a sense of skill, a sense of function but a disregard
    We will not be the first, we won’t
    You said you were going to conquer new frontiers,
    Go stick your bloody head in the jaws of the beast
    We promised the world, we’d tame it,
    what were we hoping for?
    Breath in, breath out
    So here we are reinventing the wheel
    I’m shaking hands with a hurricane
    It’s a colour that I can’t describe,
    It’s a language I can’t understand
    Ambition, tearing out the heart of you

    Maybe that will be Obama’s next campaign song.

    Posted by: ohrealy at February 20, 2008 11:51 PM
    Comment #245934

    ohrealy,
    You really seem to be a very sore over Obama’s string of wins. Maybe it would help to to remember that the most important thing is to NOT elect another Republican this November.

    Posted by: veritas vincit at February 21, 2008 12:57 AM
    Comment #245935

    Obama is a lightweight who is in way over his head, but he is very lucky in all things. Don’t underestimate good luck, the Latins believed in Fortuna Primigenia before the Romans,

    http://www.thaliatook.com/OGOD/primigenia.html

    Posted by: ohrealy at February 21, 2008 1:07 AM
    Comment #245940

    Whoa. Check out this NYT article about McCain’s questionable ethical standards:

    For McCain, Self-Confidence on Ethics Poses Its Own Risk

    Here McCain has been Mr. Sanctimonious in bashing Obama, meanwhile the issues raised in this article have the power to very seriously hurt his campaign.

    Posted by: veritas vincit at February 21, 2008 2:20 AM
    Comment #380592

    If toms shoes you soccer jerseys are a very careful person, you do coach purses not longchamp outlet need a protective HTC marc jacobs EVO coach outlet 3d Cases is oakley sunglasses that chi hair straighteners bad, burberry choosing a stylish case bottega veneta can also be a great reebok shoes option. Thin valentino shoes rubberized louboutin cases ghd hair can provide a juicy couture outlet fun splash of longchamp color, or eye-catching design to ralph lauren your device. These coach factory outlet items will allow you nfl jerseys to louis vuitton outlet online express your longchamp personality converse shoes through karen millen your michael kors outlet phone and asics running also can be used soccer shoes in keeping your phone louis vuitton handbags clean and free from mulberry cosmetic defects. mcm handbags Furthermore, ray ban outlet in chanel handbags such cases, true religion jeans an additional amount true religion is north face outlet added prada handbags to the device.



    This phone hollister is one supra shoes of polo ralph the most versatile options louboutin when it new balance shoes comes to modern mont blanc Smartphone. birkin bag However, louboutin this device can be coach outlet improved by herve leger adding appropriate salvatore ferragamo accessories. insanity workout Choosing coach outlet store the right accessories is the perfect way to get the lululemon outlet best experience true religion outlet with any tory burch outlet Smartphone.

    Posted by: korsu001 at July 6, 2014 10:19 PM
    Post a comment