vettereddie

Most likely because we don't have a lot of faith in McCain finishing his term, so we're comparing likely president to likely president. Also, no one saw McCain's speech, they were too busy watching football so we don't know what he said.

So let's talk McCain v. Obama.

Obama:
- Get out of Iraq
- Get into Afganastan and Pakistan if they can't handle it themselves
- Stay out of Iran
- Pro-choice
- Regulate financial institutions
- ___ marriage less important the equal ___ rights (spouse health, SS and tax benefits, adoption)
- end tax breaks for companies moving oversees (protectionist)
- Meth and weed are not the same hazard
- Alternative energy, not just increased domestic production
- China IS an economic competitor, not a partner
- NAFTA needs ammendment, NO to CAFTA
- Prayer can't prevent disasters; good policy can handle them
- Guns are a States rights issue
- Voluntary universal healthcare
- Al Qaida is stronger now than in 2001 as Iraq distracted us.
- Close Guantanamo and restore the right of habeas corpus.
- Homeland security must protect citizens, not intrude on them.

vettereddie

McCain:
- Stay in Iraq
- Naive to exclude attacking Pakistan
- Attacking Iran an option
- Pro-life
- Supports financial institution bailouts
- ___ marriage stance unknown (Palin is vehemently against)
- tax breaks for corporations will keep jobs here (how's that working out?)
- Drugs are bad, m'kay
- Drilling and more nuclear (also non-renewable) are the only way
- China IS an economic partner, needs to work on human rights
- Pro-NAFTA, pro-CAFTA
- Repeal existing gun restrictions; penalize criminal use
- Let the market decide healthcare (He gets government care from Congress)
- Making progress in Iraq from "surge"
- habeas corpus in Guantanamo leads to terrorist attacks
- I support the Bush doctrine of pre-emptive war.

coryjames

this means the middle class is screwed plain and simple



Obama 08

senseiturtle

I don't have the time at the moment to go issue-by-issue... but your statement that "No one say McCain's speech" is incorrect.

Depending on who your get your information from, McCain's audience either tied or surpassed that of Obama. AP says tied, Reuters says surpassed. References both the conventions in general, in addition to the specific acceptance speech.

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php...show_article=1
http://www.reuters.com/article/polit...39266820080905

NorCal76

Let me be clear senseiturtle, I am not interested in having an even-tempered discussion on political issues. I am extremely passionate about the issues and will make no apologies if I hurt your fragile sensibilities. I have been honest and open. I have admitted my respect for McCain the man but do not like McCain the politician. I have been open about Obama's inexperience compared to McCain. All I have seen from the opposing viewpoints on this thread are the same tired arguments fed to them by FIX News and I am sick of it.

You say that it is not your responsibility to defend McCain's voting record. You are right, it is not and I never asked you to do so. I will say that you won't defend it because you can't. I have lived in Arizona for over 29 years and have voted for McCain as my Senator in the past. I honestly cannot think of any major legislation that he has authored. So if you could please enlighten me I would appreciate it. Anything will do. As experienced as he is, it should be no problem for you to find something.

Just because something is broken does not mean that you get rid of it and get something new. McCain does not believe this however... just ask his first wife. Sorry, had to do it. If you "get rid of healthcare socialization", veterans and seniors would get even worse care than they receive now. The current system is broken. Health Care organizations usually lose money when treating these patients. So if nobody is charged with providing care for these patients they will all end up seeing somebody like Dr. Nick from The Simpsons.

You obviously missed my point about there being a difference between a soldier and a veteran. McCain has done things to help soldiers, although in my opinion not enough. He has done very little, if anything, to improve the lives of veterans.

You are right, McCain is not guaranteed to die in office. I do not wish that upon him or anybody. But, he is not a young and healthy man. That is why I bring up Palin's lack of major experience and knowledge about the issues. She may have it all figured out, I do not know. Since she won't sit down with the media, none of us do. Once her son leaves for his tour in Iraq, she owes it to the country to sit down with several media outlets and answer legitimate and fair questions. The one VP debate we are going to get and her already tired stump speech is not enough.

I do like how you answered my charge that McCain was never a Mayor, Governor, business owner or military leader by repeating the very thing I was arguing. What was it you said about honest, open and even-tempered? Hypocrite. I also never said that Leiberman or Ridge would be the best VP. Do not put words into my mouth. I said if McCain was still the maverick he once was, he wouldn't have chosen Palin. Pay attention and try to keep up next time.

Ad hominem is exactly what the Republicans are doing you doughnut! They are running on fear and ignorance because they cannot run on the issues. I am discussing the issues. Republicans don't want to discuss the issues that matter to most Americans because they stood idly by and let "W and the Gang" run this country into the ground. Am I attacking McCain's character, to a certain extent yes. Just as Republicans are attacking Obama's patriotism. An eye for an eye.

For 2006blue tc: I understand what you are saying but want to clarify a couple of things. McCain never said to "let the other prisoners go first". He said that he adhered to the first one in, first one out mentality. In my book that is not heroic, that is doing what is right and being what every American soldier should be... honorable. I may be misunderstanding you but I never said that he or any other soldier lacks heart and "*****". I think we should say intestinal fortitude rather than *****. We cannot exclude the many brave women who have fought and are fighting for this country. If you were not questioning my support for the troops, I apologize.

The United States of America used to be a symbol of hope and justice for many around the world. It is not anymore. I want that back. I want something better for my wife and daughter. I want something better for all Americans. Even you senseiturtle. We will not get that with John McCain and Sarah Palin.

senseiturtle

NorCal,

I'm happy that you're fired up about your candidate, but at this point, it's patently obvious that we fundamentally disagree on both the facts and the interpretation thereof.

You've expressed no interest in having an even-tempered discussion, by your own admission. Your later statements then regarding such discussion (of which I "can't" according to you) are irrelevant, since you've made it quite clear you will not be accepting any counterpoint. In this aspect, there's nothing for you and I to discuss.

I have made my position clear, both on the issues (in part) and on my choice of president. John McCain is not my first choice on the Republican ticket. I've also made it clear that I disagree with Obama on nearly every single issue. My personal opinion is that he's flat out wrong for the country.

And though Limbaugh's can be frequently wrong (i'm not a listener), this statement is true...

This election essentially boils down to an up-or-down referendum on Obama, since the Republicans don't have a "messiah" of their own.

I vote no.

vettereddie

Sensei,

Since you're removing McCain's views from the debate and making this a referendum on Obama. You can also look at this as a referendum on Bush and the Republican party in general on their handling of the country over the majority of the last 8 years.

I vote no.

What in particular don't you agree with him on. I'm talking SPECIFIC issues, not heresay and flat out misinformation on the only skeletons found in his closet after a brutal primary season (Rezko, Rev. Wright, Ayers [he was 8 when that happened!], the BS about his wife being a militant)

I'll start you off:
Foriegn Policy
- thinks Iraq was a mistake, should leave as fast as we safely can, and the plan is supported by the Iraqi government
- Wants to finish the job in Afganastan, and possibly move into Pakistan
- China is not our enemy, but is not our friend, they are in competition with us for dollars and resources
- Russia is a growing threat but unilateral action is not the answer
- It is not a good idea to use military force against Iran

Domestic policy
- gun ownership limitations are a matter for the states
- universal healthcare is voluntary, not manditory, like Bush's Medicare B.
- No Child Left Behind left children behind

Trade
- Hold mortgage companies accountable for their mistakes
- Bail out homeowners, not big business
- Stop rewarding companies for sending jobs overseas
- Ammend NAFTA to protect American workers, is against CAFTA

Taxes:
- It's wrong to have someone making less to have to pay more the way the current structure is.
- Middle America should pay less, wealthy America more

Feel free to add your own.

NorCal76

Senseiturtle, I think you mean blatantly obvious not patently. Do all Republicans butcher the English language? We do disagree and that is fine. That is what makes this country great. We are all free to express our opinions even if we vehemently disagree with one another.

I wanted an open and honest discussion with you on the issues. I have challenged you on the issue of McCain's experience as a Senator. I would be happy for you to show me a major piece of legislation that McCain has authored. You didn't, you can't and you won't. Republicans want this to be "an up or down referendum on Obama" because they cannot run on the issues. They would lose every one. So nice having an open and honest debate with you. You have proved my point. Take care of yourself.

senseiturtle

With reference to my verbage-------

No, I meant "patently."

Princeton dictonary--- http://wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=patently
Wiktionary -- http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/patently

Defined as : Adverb
patently
1. In a clear and unambiguous manner.
------------------------------------------------------

You challenged me to name "any major piece of legislation" authored by John McCain. Ok, here I go.

The big one, McCain-Feingold Campaign Reform Act.... This is about as "major" as it gets.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biparti...ign_Reform_Act

Some other ones, just for giggles.

-Indian Gaming Regulatory act - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_...Regulatory_Act
- Cosponsored the legislation that created the 9/11 Commission
- Cosponsored the Climate Stewardship Act, which established the cap + trade system.
- the Secure America and Orderly Immigration Act (S. 1033), a bill proposed in May 2005 by Senators Ted Kennedy and John McCain, sometimes referred to as the "McCain-Kennedy or McKennedy Bill"
- An amendmant to stop the use of US torture --- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCain_Detainee_Amendment

Quick wikipedia search yields plenty of answers.
--------------------------------


Vetter- I'll happily reply to your post... yet, it'll take some time to go through the issues one-by-one, and I'll likely include things you haven't mentioned. I'll use the "ontheissues" site you have previously referenced... I'm beginning to like it ! The reason my time is pressed, is because I'm in medical school, and have a test Monday. I'll have a little bit of downtime to respond fully.

Since you're soliciting personal opinion, you'll likely get it.

vettereddie

No problem on the response time, we've still got 60 days. I feel you on the school thing, I start my next master's course on Monday after work, contract and financial management, I'm not looking forward to it.

I commend McCain for sponsoring the McCain-Feingold-Kennedy act, but find it ironic that the DNC has now filed a lawsuit with the FEC against McCain for violating his OWN act. What is the definition of hypocrisy?

Article here:
http://firedoglake.com/2008/06/17/dn...-mccain-redux/

On a personal level, it frightens me that the possible next president does not even know how to email. At least we won't have to worry about him "accidentally" deleting some of it, unlike our current administration. What's going to happen when a net neutrality bill comes across his desk. How will he know whether or not to veto if he can't even use a computer?

I just found this qoute and found it at once both humorous and sad:

senseiturtle

I love that quote. It's the truth !

Just a quick point about the lawsuits... plenty of lawsuits are filed under false pretenses, particularly in cases of potential personal or political gain.

While the possibility exists that McCain has violated his own act, there also exists the likely possibility that it's a political STUNT by the DNC. As we've agreed before, what matters in today's political arena is WHAT you say and HOW you say it, not the facts surrounding your claims.

The simple fact the DNC has filed a lawsuit has political implications, which are immediately redeemable. The lawsuit will make front-page headlines... and a guilty verdict will make front-page headlines... yet, if proven innocent, that'll get relegated to the bottom of page "A27," next to the bra ads.

Zandozan

This thread has given me one more reason why I'd rather be driving. I follow politics closely to stay informed and make an educated decision when I vote. Let's be honest though- has anyone EVER met a politician they'd trust alone with their grandma?

NorCal76

You actually cited Wikipedia!? Any legitimate educational institution would immediately dismiss your source as legitimate.



As far as your use of patently, I stand corrected. As far as his authorship goes, I commend you for looking. Don't think that I am ignoring your findings. I just want to review these on a legitimate site (senate.gov) before I post a response. Again though, I appreciate the effort.

senseiturtle

There's plenty of information found on Wikipedia that's incorrect, yet, the academic sources cited at the base of pages are generally valid. We (the students at my institution) get away with it all the time. If pressured, though, we go to academic sources not typically available (or just non-user-friendly) to the general public. Same as lawyers, scientists, etc.

Just figured it'd be easier, for the sake of our discussion, to superficially answer the question posed. A senate.gov , or more exhaustive search would come up with the same results, sure, but would make no regard to the degree of influence. A little bill, and a "big bill," get listed the same.

CDogbert

Wikipedia is a wonderful treasure chest of sources. If the information isn't cited, I don't trust it at all. If it comes from a credible source, I treat it as fact.

This thread has accelerated too quickly for me to keep up at present, so I'm just going to observe for a while.

CarbonXe

iTrader: (1)

13edge

Even though we probably don't agree, I have to give you props on this one. Most people today try and dance around the subject to be all PC about everything.

As it stands now, I hate Obama and Palin equally. I really do like McCain and Biden both, even though they're from differing parties. Can't vote for McCain, cause he's old and might die. Can't vote for Obama, cause he's young and won't.

It's all subject to change, but right now it's a coin flip... and if it comes up Obama, then best of 3.

Sciond

I can only hope McCain is too old to finish the election and has a breakdown,,,,,BTW Palin great job in managing your family and your daughters 2 pregnancies....

NorCal76

Senseiturtle, I am glad that you brought up the "big one". The so-called McCain-Feingold Act of 2002 is an excellent example of McCain's hypocrisy. The Republican Governors Association slips through a loophole in that piece of legislation. In doing so they are able to donate more than the $2300 legal cap to presidential candidates. McCain knows these loopholes (he helped author the bill) and is exploiting them. The McCain-Feingold Act of 2002 does not apply to all types of fund raising. National parties can accept up to $28,500 and state parties can collect up to $10,000 to spend on federal campaigns. Donors with deep pockets (the oil industry) can avoid limits completely by contributing to 527 organizations. If you do not know what a 527 organization does, just ask John Kerry. 527s can collect from companies and unions which have been prohibited from giving to candidates or parties since... 2002.

As for the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005, McCain did not author that piece of legislation. It was based on his S.Amdt. 1977 which forms the first two sections of the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005. Overall, the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005 is a feeble and incongruous attempt to restore America’s credibility as a country that does not practice or condone torture and the use of cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment. There are sections of the Detainee Treatment Act that do not address detainee abuse and torture. There are even more ways that a determined or unconstitutional President could easily ignore or circumvent the restrictions in the Detainee Treatment Act. It does not stop torture, it just tries to make it look like we stopped torturing detainees. McCain as a former POW should have known better and stood up for what is right. Instead he went along with W and the Gang.

I could go on about the others you mentioned but I won't. I have issues with the way we continue to treat Native Americans. The Indian Gaming Regulatory Act is just a peace pipe in my opinion but I will not put the sole blame on McCain. The 9/11 Commission was an investigation not legislation. Immigration is an issue that I kind of sit on the fence about so I could argue either way. The Climate Stewardship Act is something of interest to me since McCain has flip-flopped numerous times in regards to environmental issues. For example, he is for nuclear power but will not allow nuclear waste to be transported through his "home state" of Arizona. You cannot have one without the other John so which is it? Is nuclear power good or bad?

HYPOCRITE!

CDogbert

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_TiQCJXpbKg