Third Party & Independents Archives

How McCain Blew It

The Maverick? Not hardly.

He has shown the American people he is far from being the ‘maverick’ they were lead to believe he is.

1st problem: McCain has spent his career fighting against the influence of Lobbyists.

"In the Senate, John continued to demand that Congress put an end to loopholes for special interests and fix the broken system in Washington that too often allows lobbyists to write legislation and members of Congress to waste taxpayer money. " - JohnMcCain.com

How long has he been there? The 'special interest' problem has done nothing but get worse.

How can anyone believe this when he has former Lobbyists working on his campaign? Will these people be working in 'his' White house or will they go back to lobbying?

"But the bottom line is, both sides have ties to lobbyists, meaning whomever wins will have a hard time backing up the rhetoric about change and shaking up Washington." - CNN Fact Check

2nd Problem: Our financial crisis.

I did not believe that John McCain could run to Washington and get ANYONE to do the right thing.

I was more bothered by the fact that he did not start naming names. He did not pin anyone down. He has started naming names now. IMO, way too late!

The man has nothing to lose but the Presidency. He should be going all out. He knows who the 'bad guys' in Washington are. He knows exactly how these problems began. He knows exactly why they weren't corrected BEFORE this crisis.

My question is: Why is 'The Maverick' not being one?

He doesn't need to go back to the senate. He doesn't need to go work with them everyday. The best thing he can do right now is NAME NAMES!If he would do that, these people may lose their own run for re-election and they would be gone.

If he is sincerely for changing Washington he would be telling us right now which of these politicians should be thrown out on their rears. Just shows me he is more concerned with getting his old job back when he loses, and being able to 'work' with his fellow Senators, than doing the right thing for us.

Granted, the man may think he can accomplish change when he gets in the White House. The problem is...he will be working with the same old people.

Sure. He has blown it in other ways. Just do a search on why McCain has been given the 'Maverick' name. No wonder those on the right could not embrace him. He may lose those in the middle due to the fact that the 'Maverick' label is not what people were lead to believe. I, for one, expected him to go after ALL of his fellow Politicians. He has failed to do so.

Posted by Dawn at October 11, 2008 10:27 PM
Comments
Comment #266612

And he thinks that we have won the war, which is certainly different from everyone else besides silicon eagle. Real mavericks alright.

As long as wining the war means being kicked out with time lines imposed by the Iraqi government.

Posted by: horse at October 12, 2008 3:29 AM
Comment #266624

John has NEVER been a maverick…his has been the mantle of ‘contrarian’ on occasion, but ‘maverick’…hardly.

His days in the sun are over anyway (not intended as a swipe at his skin problem), as he falters at every turn and has become so erratic that even his supporters have begun to wonder about him.

JohnLewis is wrong…mccain isn’t acting like George Wallace…Wallace had a direction…mccain is just scatter-shot.

Posted by: Marysdude at October 12, 2008 10:17 AM
Comment #266625

The first name on McCain’s list to expose for earmarks should be JOHN MCCAIN! He did after all, vote for the Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (financial rescue bill) loaded with extraneous pork and earmark spending, just a couple weeks ago.

The hypocrisy is beyond belief. Either he didn’t read the bill and voted on for it, which demonstrates negligence as a Senator, or, he really isn’t opposed to earmarks and pork spending as a means of getting a bill passed, which makes him just like every other incumbent who should be exposed for picking tax payer’s pockets with their power of office.

Posted by: David R. Remer at October 12, 2008 10:38 AM
Comment #266628

As a long time member of the congressional insiders club McCain certainly is no maverick. In order to be considered part of that club these folks have to remain loyal to the brotherhood. And the brotherhood does not cross lines with a fellow member, lest they might be abolished from the club. McCain is in a catch 22 here. If he loses this election he will hope to return to that club. But then can he win without denouncing that club as Dawn says. Can he win if he does denounce them? I doubt it. He has flipped, flopped and changed directions so many times on so many issues that even he is having problems keeping it all straight. His main barricade to the presidency has been self created by allowing his campaign to pursue a rovian approach. All he really has accomplished is somewhat satisfying the 30% that hate all things liberal. And even they are not entirely happy because he has failed to sink as low as they would prefer. I have said before that he no longer knows who he is or what he stands for. I continue to stand by that valuation.

Posted by: RickIL at October 12, 2008 10:57 AM
Comment #266642

Rick
There is plenty of blame to go around to all. President Carter to Bush Sr. to Clinton to W.
Plus no one in Congress took their oversight obligations seriously.
The Senate and the House did not protect us.
If you really want change and if you really want to get the attention of Washington then it will take voting action.
The only thing Washington understands, other then money, is being re-elected to office.
The answer is RE-ELECT NO ONE.
Replace the House this November and one third of the Senate.
All new is a real change. Not just talk.
Use your vote for action.
Re-elect no one.

Posted by: Sean Hollahan at October 12, 2008 2:55 PM
Comment #266679

McCain admitted on Public Radio in 2005 that he looks the other way.

McCain’s tough talk is just talk.
Few (if any) incumbent politicians do anything to police their own ranks.

McCain cheated on his first wife, Carol, and married Cindy one month after divorcing Carol.

By the way, have you heard the rampant lies about Obama’s tax plan. FOX news is spreading the lies like wildfire, saying that Barack Obama’s tax plan gives money to people that pay no taxes. What Steve Doocy on FOX and Friends conveniently failed to recognize is that everyone is legally obligated to pay Social Security and Medicare taxes, which consist of 7.65% by the employee and 7.65% by the employer (which really comes out of the employees pocket), which is a whopping 15.3%.

So, Steve Doocy is either mistaken or lying. Take your pick.

By the way, I don’t regularly watch FOX and Friend. I only tune to it occasionally for a good laugh and to see the current right-wing spin and lies.

At any rate, the voters have the government that the voters elect (and re-elect, and re-elect, and re-elect , … , at least until that finally becomes too painful).

Posted by: d.a.n at October 13, 2008 7:47 AM
Comment #266681
Sean Hollahan wrote: If you really want change and if you really want to get the attention of Washington then it will take voting action. The only thing Washington understands, other then money, is being re-elected to office. The answer is RE-ELECT NO ONE. Replace the House this November and one third of the Senate. All new is a real change. Not just talk. Use your vote for action. Re-elect no one.
That’s right.

After all, who can name 50, 100, 200, or even 268 (half of 535) in Congress that are responsible and accountable?
For several years, no one has been able to answer that one simple question.
Unless someone can name at least 268 (half of 535) in Congress that are responsible and accountable, what does it mean about Congress as a whole, and the voters that repeatedly reward those same incumbent politicians with perpetual re-election?

Why?

Because government won’t become more responsible and accountable until the voters do first, and that ain’t gonna happen by repeatedly rewarding bad politicians with perpetual 85%-to-90% re-election rates.

The voters’ rhetoric and 9% approval ratings for Congress does not match the voters’ voting habits (85%-to-90% re-election rates for Congress).

Why?

Because blind partisan loyalties are powerfully strong … at least until that becomes too painful.
It is easier to fuel and wallow in the blind partisan warfare than admit that THEIR politicians in THEIR own party are no better to any significant degree that matters.
However, pain and misery will finally trump laziness, blind and delusional partisan loyalties, apathy, and complacency.

Anti-incumbent sentiment is growing, but few in the news and main-stream media report about it.

Anti-incumbent sentimate is growing, but needs to grow much larger to have a real impact. That may require more pain and misery than we have today. Afterall, it took over 3 years into the Great Depression before unhappy voters finally ousted a whopping 206 members of Congress.

Regarding the current economic melt-down … this ain’t nothin’ compared to what it will be like by about year 2012, when the nation-wide debt has grown by another $10 Trillion (or more), and the capacity to borrow and print-money can no longer keep the debt-pyramid (currently, $67 Trillion of nation-wide debt) from collapsing.

That is, all of these bail-outs are only delaying the inevitable. The laws and principles of math and economics did not suddenly vanish with all of the new borrowing, money-printing, pork-barrel, and waste.

You don’t have to be a genius to make such a prediction. A bit of simple math alone is sufficient. After all, for over a year, no one has been able to answer one simple question:

    Where will the money come from to merely pay the INTEREST on $54 Trillion -to- $67 Trillion of nation-wide debt , much less the money to reduce the current PRINCIPAL debt of $54 Trillion to- $67 Trillion and prevent it from growing ever larger, when that money does not already exist? Especially now, when 80% of the U.S. population owns only 17% (or less) of all wealth, and 1% owns 40% of all wealth (up by 20% from 20% in year 1976); a wealth disparity gap that has never been worse since the Great Depression.

Posted by: d.a.n at October 13, 2008 8:41 AM
Comment #266727

d.a.n. writes; “Because blind partisan loyalties are powerfully strong … at least until that becomes too painful.”

That is one-half correct d.a.n. and the other half is a growing public appetite for more entitlements and pork barrel spending. Our political class has become expert in making promises for “free-stuff” that appeals to many.

Actually, I believe we are approaching a majority in the country that believe that the only way they will get a fair shake is by demanding more entitlements. When those not paying taxes find they can demand more from those who do thru their legislators why wouldn’t they continue to vote for the incumbents of either party.

Recently, both reps and dems in congress have become experts in buying votes with others money. Who is left that will vote for responsible spending and responsible tax revision? We have Obama calling for higher taxes, even if it harms our economy, because it is “fair”. Joe Biden calls higher taxes “patriotic”. McCain and most office holding reps are big spenders and big taxers as well.

It took a long time in our nation’s history to discover entitlements in our founding documents. Such strong and simply written documents take a long time to subvert. The door was opened with the New Deal and that door will never again be closed.

Government of, by, and for the people has been subverted to mean; government takes from those who produce, and gives to those who don’t, enslaving all.

Posted by: Jim M at October 13, 2008 5:24 PM
Comment #266732

Jim M, just one flaw! Those who are poor and receive welfare generally don’t vote. It’s those who are wealthy and receiving public assistance that you have to worry about in terms of public policy.

Posted by: David R. Remer at October 13, 2008 6:02 PM
Comment #266739
Jim M wrote:
  • d.a.n. writes; “Because blind partisan loyalties are powerfully strong … at least until that becomes too painful.”
That is one-half correct d.a.n …
HMMmmmmm … I believe that is mostly true regardless of party affiliation. Of course, few of the blindly partisan will agree … at least until their delusion becomes too painful.
Jim M wrote: … and the other half is a growing public appetite for more entitlements and pork barrel spending. Our political class has become expert in making promises for “free-stuff” that appeals to many.
That’s a separate issue (i.e. people with blind partisan loyalties regardless of issues and platforms versus people that perpetuate the myth that we can all live at the expense of everyone else).

But I agree 100% that too many people want the government to take care of them from cradle-to-grave, and are easily bribed with their own (or others’) tax dollars.
No doubt about it … the politicians are experts at manipulating the majority of voters … at least until the politicians greed finally becomes too painful for enough voters.
When the voters have finally had enough, they will do what the most unhappy voters did in year 1933 (over 3 years into the Great Depression), when they ousted a whopping 206 members of Congress.

Jim M wrote: Actually, I believe we are approaching a majority in the country that believe that the only way they will get a fair shake is by demanding more entitlements.
Maybe. But the cradle-to-grave mentality is created by governments’ tendency to create an unheatlhy dependency of the voters on the government. That government then grows to nightmare proportions as it tries to control and manipulate everything to foster those dependencies.

There are basically two types of people:

  • (1) the wealthy who want lower taxes (mostly Republicans)

  • (2) these non-wealthy, who want something to show for the taxes they pay (mostly Democrats)

What BOTH fail to understand is that THEIR politicians are screwing most (if not all) voters.

Taxes are too high, and the federal government is too large, and severely out of control (as evidenced by an economic melt-down that some think is over, but will continue to unfold for 2-to-4 years to follow, as the debt pyramid grows ever larger).

At the moment, the current tax system is actually regressive, as evidenced by Warren Buffet, the 2nd wealthiest person in the U.S., who paid a lower percentage of income to federal taxes (e.g. 17.7% on $46 Million in year 2006) than his secretary (who paid 30% in federal taxes on an income of $60K). Warren Buffet told Tom Brokaw on “NBC Nightly News” that the U.S. tax structure is unfair. Warren Buffet performed an informal poll in his office, where the average tax rate was 32.9%, compared to his 17.7% percent, citing that as evidence that “the tax system has tilted toward the rich in the last 10 years”.

Jim M wrote: When those not paying taxes find they can demand more from those who do thru their legislators why wouldn’t they continue to vote for the incumbents of either party.
First of all, anyone who works is obligated to pay Social Security and Medicare taxes:
  • Social Security tax is: 2 * 6.2% = 12.4% (on the first $94,200; on the gross income, before any deductions);
  • Medicare tax is: 2 * 1.45% = 2.9% (there is no cap on Medicare; on the gross income, before any deductions);
  • Total Social Security and Medicare tax rate is: 2 * (6.2% + 1.45%) = 2 * 7.65% = 15.3% (the employer pays half of the Social Security and Medicare tax, but it really comes out of the employee’s income; the employee really bears this cost; also, the self-employed pay the entire 15.3% themselves);
For people with very low incomes, they may pay no income taxes. Worrying about that is pointless, since we can’t get blood out of a turnip.

A major problem is the massive entitlements system, because Congress borrowed and spent $12.8 Trillion from Social Security, leaving it pay-as-you-go, with a 77 Million baby-boomer bubble approaching (13,175 new recipients per day!). Where’s the money going to come from?

Jim M wrote: Recently, both reps and dems in congress have become experts in buying votes with others money.
True … at least until that finally becomes too painful, and there will be painful consequences for the debt that continues to grow to nightmare proportions. These bail-outs (rampant borrowing and money-printing) will only delay the collapse of the debt pyramid a few more years. It’s not a matter of “IF”. It’s only a matter of “WHEN”.
Jim M wrote: Who is left that will vote for responsible spending and responsible tax revision?
The numbers of those voters wanting more fiscal responsibility are growing, but too slowly to avoid a lot of the pain and misery already in the pipeline.
Jim M wrote: We have Obama calling for higher taxes, even if it harms our economy, because it is “fair”. Joe Biden calls higher taxes “patriotic”.
The current tax system is regressive, and that is not hard to prove, based on gross income (not on taxable income after a myriad of tax loopholes). Even Warren Buffet admits it (www.huffingtonpost.com/2007/10/30/watch-warren-buffett-cal_n_70455.html). Barack Obama’s tax plan (if implemented) would make the tax system less regressive, but it would raise (or maintain) some taxes at obscene levels (e.g. 40% Estate Taxes). McCain’s tax plan would make the tax system more regressive than ever. I’m not sure that McCain really understands that, because he isn’t the sharpest knife in the drawer (graduating 894th in a class of 899 students), and I find it a bit disturbing that McCain admits to being computer illiterate.

NEITHER McCain or Obama are dedicated to real fairness and fiscal responsibility.
Especially when it comes to illegal immigration.
Both McCain and Obama choose to despicably pit American citizens and illegal aliens against each other for votes (One-Simple-Idea.com/VoteDemocrat.gif), profits , and (supposedly) compassion (One-Simple-Idea.com/BorderSecurity.htm#Compassion).
BOTH McCain and Obama have grandiose plans to spend, spend, spend.
BOTH McCain’s and Obama’s plans show that they will continue deficit spending for many years to come, which is why the much-needed fiscal responsibility to prevent an economic melt-down is highly probable.
NEITHER McCain or Obama will do much (if anything) to reduce these 10 major abuses hammering most Americans.

Jim M wrote: McCain and most office holding reps are big spenders and big taxers as well.
That’s right, and the majority of them (including BOTH McCain and Obama just voted FOR one of the biggest pork-barrel BILLs in history (H.R. 1424).
Jim M wrote: It took a long time in our nation’s history to discover entitlements in our founding documents. Such strong and simply written documents take a long time to subvert. The door was opened with the New Deal and that door will never again be closed.
Maybe. Maybe not.

The massive debt pyramid and a total economic melt-down in the next 2-to-4 years could solve the problem of entitlements.
Especially since the problem is still being ignored, along with numerous other problems growing dangerously in number and severity.

Jim M wrote: Government of, by, and for the people has been subverted to mean; government takes from those who produce, and gives to those who don’t, enslaving all.
False.

Government takes from all of them. They simply take a little less (based on percentage of gross income) from the wealthy.
There was a period in the past when taxes may have actually been progressive, but that is not the case today.

This is a huge source of confusion for many Americans because too few have actually researched the issue to find out the real truth.
The real truth is this: For the most part, the current U.S. federal tax system is regressive, and most of the wealthy actually pay a smaller percentage of their gross income to federal taxes.
The current tax system is regressive because:

  • numerous tax loop-holes and ridiculous complexity which makes it ripe for abuse (mostly, tax loop-holes for the wealthy);

  • capital gains and some dividends are taxed at 5% to 15% (which also mostly benefits the wealthy);

  • capital gains are exempt from Social Security and Medicare taxes, but not labor income (which also mostly benefits the wealthy);

  • income above the cap ($94,200 in year 2006, $97,500 for year 2007) are exempt from Social Security taxes.

Even Warren Buffet knows this and has said so many times.

As for this election, I think McCain will lose.
McCain blew it in many ways.
While BOTH Obama and McCain are dismally screwed up on numerous issues, McCain is:

  • slightly more wrong than Obama on taxes;

  • equally wrong as Obama on illegal immigration; McCain voted for the 1st shamnesty of year 1986;

  • equally wrong on the bail-out; possibly worse than Obama based on his $300 Billion plan to buy toxic debt;

  • equally wrong on upholding the U.S. Constitution (e.g. Article V);

  • more wrong than Obama on prolonging the occupation of Iraq;

  • equally wrong on economic (even though McCain said “I have Greenspan’s book” as if that will teach him everything he needs to know); you’d think McCain would know much more after 26 years in Congress?;

  • equally wrong about looking the other way; something McCain admitted to doing in year 2005 on National Public Radio.

  • and McCain cheated on his first wife;

At any rate, the voters have the government that the voters elect (and re-elect, and re-elect, and re-elect , … , at least until that finally becomes too painful).

Posted by: d.a.n at October 13, 2008 6:59 PM
Comment #266741

I would disagree with Remer’s assessment of who votes. The political class that has and continues to provide entitlements knows very well who has the most votes in an election and it’s not the outnumbered wealthy.

I would agree with Remer that the wealthy are getting their share of the pork and tax loopholes but it is in the form of favorable legislation thru lobbying efforts. Apparently Remer and I have different meanings for the word “entitlement”.

Tax breaks and loopholes come and go…entitlements are forever and live and thrive regardless of the party in power.

Posted by: Jim M at October 13, 2008 7:07 PM
Comment #266755

I believe this election will draw a record number of voters from the lower to middle class Americans.

Posted by: yourdailyslice at October 13, 2008 10:10 PM
Comment #266760

Jim M, which has more power in D.C. on a day to day basis, votes of the poor, or the wealthy special interest lobbyists?

It is a rhetorical question. The answer is obvious and should be to all before making rebuttals like yours.

Posted by: David R. Remer at October 13, 2008 11:08 PM
Comment #266792

Jim M,

Government is FOR-SALE and the wealthy have the politicians in their pocket.

  • (1) The politician that spends the most money wins the election 90% of the time (which is usually the incumbent politician).
  • (2) Also, Congress enjoys 85%-to-90% re-election rates.
  • (3) 99.7% of all 200 million eligible voters are severely out-spent by a very tiny 0.3% of the wealthiest voters who make 83% of all federal campaign donations of $200 or more.
  • (4) The wealthy not only enjoy regressive taxation, but receive massive subsidies. For example, for only one state:
    • Consider these top 10 subsidy programs for one state (e.g. Texas) 1995-2006:
    • Rank ____ Subsidy ___________ Recipients _____ Total
    • 01 __ Cotton Subsidies _______ 96,628 ______ $6,126,931,257
    • 02 __ Disaster Payments _____ 144,923 ______ $2,410,774,724
    • 03 __ Conservation Reserve ___ 37,769 ______ $1,759,118,624
    • 04 __ Rice Subsidies __________ 5,619 ______ $1,325,261,031
    • 05 __ Wheat Subsidies _______ 95,337 ______ $1,291,098,137
    • 06 __ Corn Subsidies _________ 59,302 ______ $1,213,424,428
    • 07 __ Peanut Subsidies _______ 11,680 ______ $491,103,948
    • 08 __ Livestock Subsidies _____ 84,430 ______ $456,298,603
    • 09 __ Dairy Program Subsidies ___ 2,586 ______ $92,836,865
    • 10 __ Env. Quality Incentive ___ 12,036 ______ $80,298,602
  • (5) Voters, too often, especially in presidential election years, blindly pull the party-lever, which is why Congress enjoys such high re-election rates. Also, about 40%-to-50% of voters do not bother to vote at all.
  • (6) The wealthy pay a smaller percentage of their gross income to federal taxes. The tax system is regressive.
  • (7) The wealthy despicably pit American citizens and illegal aliens against each other for profits , votes , and (supposedly, but severely misplaced) compassion.
  • (8) The Federal Reserve and member banks are nothing more than a dishonest, usurious, inflationary pyramid scheme.
  • (9) The wealthy and politicians are often above the law. Even if convicted, they can often get a pardon. Many wealthy are able to avoid jail because they are wealthy.
The wealthy definitely get more than their fair share (regressive taxes, subsidies, pork-barrel, entitlements, etc.), and also have an unfair influence and control of the government.

However, the voters only have themselves to thank for it, because they have the mechanism right under their very own noses to help stop the abuses.
Simply stop repeatedly rewarding corrupt politicians with perpetual re-election.

At any rate, the voters have the government that the voters elect (and re-elect, and re-elect, and re-elect , … , at least until that finally becomes too painful).

Posted by: d.a.n at October 14, 2008 11:43 AM
Comment #266905

NOTE: The above is not trying to say wealthy people are worse than non-wealthy people.

The point is, wealth is Power.
Power Corrupts.
And absolute Power Corrupts absolutely.

That is, most people, with the wealth and opportunity, without sufficient law enforcement and civil oversight, will abuse the power that comes from their wealth, and a prime example of that is that fact that government is FOR-SALE, as evidenced by the 99.7% of all 200 million that are severely out-spent by a very tiny 0.3% of the wealthiest voters who make 83% of all federal campaign donations of $200 or more.

Posted by: d.a.n at October 15, 2008 10:33 AM
Post a comment