John McCain

John McCain (Full Version)

All Forums >> [General] >> Current Events

Message

vixir -> John McCain (5/22/2008 11:26:26 PM)
I'm sorry, but he's a total moron. lol I cannot believe that some people actually stand by him. After his inconsistent answers, I would have dropped as a supporter of his. Anyway, here are the links. They're hilarious, to say the least. McCain # 1 McCain # 2

ChristianNewsWatch -> RE: John McCain (5/23/2008 12:31:05 AM)
Just a few keywords describe whose side all the remaining candidates.... errrr... puppets are on. Council on Foreign Relations Verichip / RFID chips International Monetary Fund FEMA Detention Camps Military Commission Act Patriot Act FISA Federal Reserve Many more... The only candidate that would have been different then all the rest is Ron Paul... even Huckabee is / was advised by Richard Haass, current director of the Council on Foreign Relations. All the keywords listed above (and many more) have to do with the globalist agenda.. aka the coming anti-Christ government. So about John McCain... a vote for him, Hilary or Obama is a vote for their agenda. Myself, I'll be casting a write in vote for Ron Paul. Learn more about him, via a Christian perspective at ChristiansForRonPaul.com [:)]

Jhud -> RE: John McCain (5/23/2008 9:52:15 AM)
Politics by youtube. It's going to be a long campaign.

ken1906_4 -> RE: John McCain (5/23/2008 12:29:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ChristianNewsWatch Just a few keywords describe whose side all the remaining candidates.... errrr... puppets are on. Council on Foreign Relations Verichip / RFID chips International Monetary Fund FEMA Detention Camps Military Commission Act Patriot Act FISA Federal Reserve Many more... The only candidate that would have been different then all the rest is Ron Paul... even Huckabee is / was advised by Richard Haass, current director of the Council on Foreign Relations. All the keywords listed above (and many more) have to do with the globalist agenda.. aka the coming anti-Christ government. So about John McCain... a vote for him, Hilary or Obama is a vote for their agenda. Myself, I'll be casting a write in vote for Ron Paul. Learn more about him, via a Christian perspective at ChristiansForRonPaul.com [:)] The CFR is the root to the rest of this list and Senator McCain is a card carrying member. Not sure about Obama and Hillary well she maybe guilty by association since her husband is a member of the CFR also. Unfortunately your post is going to be marginalized down to a simple conspiracy theory. The whole thing is not only anti-american, but it's against Christ and there are those on both side of the aisle who care nothing more than to control the masses with money and power.

1dblthnk02 -> RE: John McCain (5/27/2008 10:45:04 AM)
Thank you, John McCain. And "Thank" isn't necessarily what I wanted that first word to be . . .

Jhud -> RE: John McCain (5/27/2008 3:02:51 PM)
quote: Thank you, John McCain. And "Thank" isn't necessarily what I wanted that first word to be . . . Are you going to spam all the John McCain threads with this garbage?

1dblthnk02 -> RE: John McCain (5/28/2008 9:24:46 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Jhud Are you going to spam all the John McCain threads with this garbage? What if I do? And it is not "garbage." Sorry to tread upon the toes of your misconceptions, Jhud. The fact is that you are probably settling by going the ordinary vote-the-party-line route. When did John McCain become such a great guy in your book: when he became the only candidate from the right?

Jhud -> RE: John McCain (5/28/2008 9:01:03 PM)
quote: What if I do? And it is not "garbage." Sorry to tread upon the toes of your misconceptions, Jhud. The fact is that you are probably settling by going the ordinary vote-the-party-line route. When did John McCain become such a great guy in your book: when he became the only candidate from the right? Well spammig the bards against the TOS; just thought you might like to know. And while John McCain certainly hasn't been the only candidate from the right (and he definitely wasn't my favorite in the race) he is currently the the most rightward of the currently viable candidates, and thus, is greater than the other options.

1dblthnk02 -> RE: John McCain (5/29/2008 9:34:53 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Jhud Well spammig the bards against the TOS; just thought you might like to know. Thanks for the tip. quote: And while John McCain certainly hasn't been the only candidate from the right (and he definitely wasn't my favorite in the race) he is currently the the most rightward of the currently viable candidates, and thus, is greater than the other options. Exactly like I said-- you are settling. And that's fine until you start "fluffing" the consolation candidate as if he were a wonderful man. If he is so great, why wasn't he your favorite all along?

JimboFletch -> RE: John McCain (5/29/2008 10:29:55 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: 1dblthnk02 quote: ORIGINAL: Jhud Well spammig the bards against the TOS; just thought you might like to know. Thanks for the tip. quote: And while John McCain certainly hasn't been the only candidate from the right (and he definitely wasn't my favorite in the race) he is currently the the most rightward of the currently viable candidates, and thus, is greater than the other options. Exactly like I said-- you are settling. And that's fine until you start "fluffing" the consolation candidate as if he were a wonderful man. If he is so great, why wasn't he your favorite all along? I would rather "settle" than allow the most liberal candidate this country has ever seen to have a chance at filling the courts with judges that favor more legalized death and the sodomization of the US. Writing in a vote for the perfect candidate without a chance of winning is, in my book, the same as voting for a leftist liberal. Whatever good you might say about Ron Paul or other 3rd party candidates, you can't say voting for them will improve a single, solitary thing because they will not be elected. So voting that way is "settling" for the one who does win.

inthysite -> RE: John McCain (5/29/2008 10:56:46 AM)
No independent or third party candidate has ever done more than take votes away from one of the other parties and help thwart an election. They have never been elected and never will be. A vote for them is throwing your vote away. While McCain may not have all the desired policy positions of the Conservatives he still has several good qualifications for president and some sound policies. If Barack wins we will have the most liberal president that has ever been elected to office. Add to that a democratic controlled congress with enough seats for a majority, which is highly possible right now, and you are just heading for trouble. Talk about a Manchurian Candidate. You will have a junior senator with no experience who will be controlled by congress. They will pass their liberal policy bills and Obama will sign them. They will be unstoppable and there will be no balance at all. One of the great things about our country, the one thing that makes this whole mess work is that there is a balance. While the strength has at times leaned one way or the other there has always been enough of a balance to keep the other party in check, but what we are looking at has not been seen in years if ever and I believe it will destroy our country. It will set us back decades.

1dblthnk02 -> RE: John McCain (5/29/2008 1:00:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JimboFletch Writing in a vote for the perfect candidate without a chance of winning is, in my book, the same as voting for a leftist liberal. Who was talking about write-ins? All I am saying is that it is shallow to settle for the consolation candidate and then fluff him up with flattering commentary to make the situation look better than it really is. quote: ORIGINAL: inthysite While McCain may not have all the desired policy positions of the Conservatives he still has several good qualifications for president and some sound policies. What "sound policies?" Like "removing" Indian people off of their lands for the sake of big business? quote: While the strength has at times leaned one way or the other there has always been enough of a balance to keep the other party in check, but what we are looking at has not been seen in years if ever and I believe it will destroy our country. It will set us back decades. There are those of us who believe that the current passing administration has already dropped the U.S. in a fear-based hole of financial debt and xenophobic policies wherein we reject the very principles that this country was founded on. This is worse than "setting us back decades."

inthysite -> RE: John McCain (5/29/2008 1:22:34 PM)
Like I said, I don't agree with everything McCain stands for but I believe in more of his policies than I do the other choice. I believe in his stance on the sanctity of life, the issue of securing our border, his stance on conservative judges, his belief in free market answers to the economy and healthcare rather than socialization, just to name a few. And he's a whole lot better than the democrats who finally admitted that they are for socialization! Maxine Waters Wants To "Socialize" Oil Companies

1dblthnk02 -> RE: John McCain (5/29/2008 1:30:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: inthysite Like I said, I don't agree with everything McCain stands for but I believe in more of his policies than I do the other choice. Was he your first choice all along?

inthysite -> RE: John McCain (5/29/2008 2:05:24 PM)
No, but he's the best of what is available and a choice must be made. It's like when you go to a restaurant and you have a craving for lobster but when you get there they are all out of lobster so now your choices are steak, liver and onions, or the veggie plate. Well I'm hungry and I have to eat so I must make a choice. I like steak, not near as much as lobster but it will still do. I don't like liver and onions or veggie plates so I'm not going to select those. So while I didn't get what I originally wanted I, to use your wording, "settled" on something I could stomach.

1dblthnk02 -> RE: John McCain (5/29/2008 3:21:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: inthysite No, but he's the best of what is available and a choice must be made. He's the Republican consolation prize. Many right wingers, Christian and non-Christian alike, were very critical of McCain before the mantle finally fell to him. Now, such critics are faced with one of two choices: either run for cover and wait for the fallout, or else lift their collective chins off of their chests and put on the pretense that says, "You know, he is a really great guy . . ." quote: So while I didn't get what I originally wanted I, to use your wording, "settled" on something I could stomach. So I am right. Although, I was actually trying to get Jhud to admit this, but thank you for your honesty, anyway.

Jhud -> RE: John McCain (5/29/2008 5:04:57 PM)
quote: Although, I was actually trying to get Jhud to admit this, but thank you for your honesty, anyway. What part of what I said didn't you understand? Everyone settles for a candidate in one way or another, as there are no perfect candidates.

JimboFletch -> RE: John McCain (5/29/2008 5:07:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Jhud quote: Although, I was actually trying to get Jhud to admit this, but thank you for your honesty, anyway. What part of what I said didn't you understand? Everyone settles for a candidate in one way or another, as there are no perfect candidates. Exactly!!! Even those who claim to be supporting only a born again Christian. Everyone settles.

inthysite -> RE: John McCain (5/29/2008 5:12:05 PM)
quote: So I am right. Although, I was actually trying to get Jhud to admit this, but thank you for your honesty, anyway. Glad I could make your day. quote: What part of what I said didn't you understand? Everyone settles for a candidate in one way or another, as there are no perfect candidates. I thought this was the point I was making as well, that's kind of why I put "settle" in quotes. There is no perfect candidate because I'm not running so I have to "settle" on what is available. McCain is not lobster and there may be some grizzle and/or fat in the steak that represents him in my analogy but he is still more tasteful and nourishing to me than the liver and onions or veggie plate.

HighPlainsDrifter -> RE: John McCain (5/29/2008 5:40:01 PM)
quote: And that's fine until you start "fluffing" the consolation candidate as if he were a wonderful man. Tell us, 1dblthnk02, what does "fluffing" mean?

1dblthnk02 -> RE: John McCain (5/29/2008 5:49:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HighPlainsDrifter Tell us, 1dblthnk02, what does "fluffing" mean? Like fluffing up a pillow . . .

HighPlainsDrifter -> RE: John McCain (5/29/2008 5:51:09 PM)
quote: Like fluffing up a pillow . . . Sure. You know what it really means, and should know it's completely inappropriate.

SteveSund -> RE: John McCain (5/29/2008 7:25:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: 1dblthnk02 He's the Republican consolation prize. This is true. Frankly, I am tired of the Republican party putting forth mediocre candidates and expecting every conservative to accept them just because there isn't a good alternative. Voting for the lesser of two evils is still evil.

inthysite -> RE: John McCain (5/29/2008 10:15:37 PM)
quote: This is true. Frankly, I am tired of the Republican party putting forth mediocre candidates and expecting every conservative to accept them just because there isn't a good alternative. Voting for the lesser of two evils is still evil. The problem with this statement and this logic is that the Republican party did not decide who the candidate(s) would be. Anyone who is qualified can run for president and we had a fairly large group who decided to run. The GOP didn't go out and say "Okay you, you and yeah, you on the right, you guys get to run for presidency this year. Okay you next three, uh better luck next time. Oh hey what about those two?" Then it was up to the public to decide throughout the primaries who they thought was best and McCain managed to come out on top, due largely to the independent vote and possibly some democratic crossovers doing a little "Operation Chaos" of their own. So I'm not sure where/why people think that the Republican Party is responsible for our choice this election and I don't see who they are trying to send a message to by either not voting or by voting independent, unless you are considering the voting public as the Republican Party, which as I just mentioned our candidate was decided mainly by independents and democrats. What I'm tired of is the sour grapes that come from those whose candidate didn't make it past the primaries and now they want to take their ball and go home. As I've stated before, I don't agree with everything McCain stands for, there is probably about 30% of his policies I don't like (like not wanting to drill in ANWR [:@]), but I'll support him because he best represents my views when compared to the other options out there.

1dblthnk02 -> RE: John McCain (5/30/2008 10:13:36 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HighPlainsDrifter Sure. You know what it really means, and should know it's completely inappropriate. What do you mean "inappropriate?" It is a colloquial metaphor. Sheesh . . . quote: ORIGINAL: SteveSund This is true. Frankly, I am tired of the Republican party putting forth mediocre candidates and expecting every conservative to accept them just because there isn't a good alternative. Voting for the lesser of two evils is still evil. I'm not sure that McCain is the lesser of two evils. If you have followed any of my posts about him, I have demonstrated that the man's track record from Vietnam on is morally reprehensible in many ways. Of course, my pet peeve is the PeabodyCoal-McCain Indian removal campaign. And as for "mediocre," this sums up his whole demeanor. I said this before, but McCain radiates about as much charisma as Bob Dole did back in '96. quote: ORIGINAL: inthysite Then it was up to the public to decide throughout the primaries who they thought was best This isn't exactly true. Presidential candidates do not get directly elected by popular vote, neither do presidents: quote: HOW THE CURRENT SYSTEM WORKS Contrary to popular belief, the U.S. Constitution does not instruct the states on how to select Presidential electors. Rather, this is a power reserved to the states that has been used in many different ways over the history of the nation. Electors have been elected directly without relation to a Presidential candidate, selected by state legislators, elected by district, and as is currently the case in all but two states (Maine and Nebraska), elected statewide in winner-take-all slates. The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled in multiple cases that the state's power to choose the manner of selecting electors is "supreme" "plenary" and "exclusive." Several states have even cancelled elections, including Massachusetts and New Hampshire, when they were concerned that the wrong candidates would be selected, and instead appointed the electors directly. quote: As I've stated before, I don't agree with everything McCain stands for, there is probably about 30% of his policies I don't like (like not wanting to drill in ANWR) Don't worry about the ANWR-- if nothing else, they'll just siphon under it from offshore (if they're not doing it already).

Page: [1] 2 3 4 5 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5 ANSI