Getting To Know Mccain

[CrossCuT]

[size=1]Im trying to like McCain, but its hard.
He has my vote though. Better him than Obama bin Laden.
[/size]

Edited May 23, 2008 by CrossCuT

[Lounge Daddy]

[quote name='CrossCuT' post='1538322' date='May 23 2008, 12:45 AM'][size=1]Im trying to like McCain, but its hard.

[/size][/quote]

With you on that one. He is a candidate who spent years upsetting conservatives, offending libertarians, working against the pro-life movement. Once he runs for office (again) and claims to be a conservative, claims to respect liberty, and claims to be a champion of the pro-life cause--and he hopes like heck that the voters have short memories.

Unlike the Dems, McCain doesn't really have an enthusiastic base of support outside some of the people who wished he had gotten the nomination the first time. Which is why it doesn't look good for him.

[Alycin]

[quote name='CrossCuT' post='1538322' date='May 23 2008, 12:45 AM']Obama bin Laden.
[/size][/quote]

lame

[kujo]

[quote name='Lounge Daddy' post='1538578' date='May 23 2008, 11:46 AM']With you on that one. He is a candidate who spent years upsetting conservatives, offending libertarians, working against the pro-life movement. Once he runs for office (again) and claims to be a conservative, claims to respect liberty, and claims to be a champion of the pro-life cause--and he hopes like heck that the voters have short memories.

Unlike the Dems, McCain doesn't really have an enthusiastic base of support outside some of the people who wished he had gotten the nomination the first time. Which is why it doesn't look good for him.[/quote]

Word.

This is why I believe that, unless he gets it 100% correct with the VP nomination, he has absolutely no chance in November. He's gotta pick someone that those who don't support him will not only accept, but flock to. Even then...it may be academic....

[Pontifex]

For those that say McCain is pro-choice, I would like for you to substantiate that here with a vaild source. Take the time to read and know the facts for yourselves. In the very first post I made, there is a link that gives McCain's voting record on the life issues.

For those that say McCain is another Bush, I beg to differ. His philosophy on war and us being there is VERY different from Bush. I recently saw interview of him stating that the U.S. policing the world could be compared to Rome's demise of standing armies. I will substantiate it as soon as I can find it on the net.

Voting for McCain is certainly the lesser of two evils and it will not be difficult at all for me come election day. AND I'm not a republican. I'm actually a Christofied neo-hippie Roman Catholic priest with my own mind.

[Justin86]

[quote name='Pontifex' post='1539534' date='May 24 2008, 01:27 PM']For those that say McCain is pro-choice, I would like for you to substantiate that here with a vaild source. Take the time to read and know the facts for yourselves. In the very first post I made, there is a link that gives McCain's voting record on the life issues.[/quote]
It was a comment from Sen. Rick Santourum about how John McCain would always try to ensure that pro-life bills would never reach the Senate floor. When they did, to his alleged dismay, he would vote for them thereby ensuring a 100% pro-life record for himself while not actually being pro-life at all.

[quote]RS: Well, number one, John McCain will not get the base of the Republican Party. I mean, there was a reason John McCain collapsed last year, and it's because he was the frontrunner, and everybody in the Republican Party got a chance to look at him. And when they looked at him, they wait well, wait a minute, he's not with us on almost all of the core issues of…on the economic side, he was against the President's tax cuts, he was bad on immigration. On the environment, he's absolutely terrible. He buys into the complete left wing environmentalist movement in this country. He is for bigger government on a whole laundry list of issues. He was…I mean, on medical care, I mean, he was for re-importation of drugs. I mean, you can go on down the list. I mean, this is a guy who on a lot of the core economic issues, is not even close to being a moderate, in my opinion. [b]And then on the issue of, on social conservative issues, you point to me one time John McCain every took the floor of the United States Senate to talk about a social conservative issue. It never happened. I mean, this is a guy who says he believes in these things, but I can tell you, inside the room, when we were in these meetings, there was nobody who fought harder not to have these votes before the United States Senate on some of the most important social conservative issues, whether it's marriage or abortion or the like. He always fought against us to even bring them up, because he was uncomfortable voting for them.[/b] So I mean, this is just not a guy I think in the end that washes with the mainstream of the Republican Party.[/quote]

[url="http://hughhewitt.townhall.com/talkradio/transcripts/Transcript.aspx?ContentGuid=e96c3803-c542-4a57-98bd-68635a744540"]http://hughhewitt.townhall.com/talkradio/t...bd-68635a744540[/url]

It is interesting, being that Santorum has no reason to lie since he's not running for President, or even a Senator anymore.

That being said I still think John McCain is really the best hope of the pro-life movement right now. Voting for someone who has no chance of winning to try to send a message to the Republican party will not only fall on deaf ears, but also get elected to worst possible candidate for the office imaginable.

[Apotheoun]

Sadly, McCain also supports embryonic stem cell research, and so I cannot in good conscience vote for him.

[Justin86]

That I have not heard...

[Justin86]

It's only to a slim extent that he supports it, apparently.

[quote]McCain opposes embryonic stem cell research that uses cloned human embryos. In 2006 he supported a trio of U.S. Senate bills designed to increase federal funding for adult stem cell research, ban the creation of embryos for research and offer federal support for research using embryos slated for destruction by fertility clinics. In 2007, in what he described as "a very agonizing and tough decision," he voted to allow research using human embryos left over from fertility treatments.[/quote]

[url="http://pewforum.org/religion08/compare.php?Issue=Stem_Cell_Research"]http://pewforum.org/religion08/compare.php...m_Cell_Research[/url]

I would imagine his support for it has reached the point of irrelevancy considering how even the scientists who once were strong advocates for government funding have now confessed all hope in stem cell research lies in their adult forms. I'm not sure why this is even an issue in this election.

[LouisvilleFan]

[quote name='Justin86' post='1542307' date='May 25 2008, 10:31 PM']That being said I still think John McCain is really the best hope of the pro-life movement right now. Voting for someone who has no chance of winning to try to send a message to the Republican party will not only fall on deaf ears, but also get elected to worst possible candidate for the office imaginable.[/quote]

Frankly, I think the Vatican's moratorium against abortion to the UN is a greater sign of hope than McCain. They've got India's support. That's 1 out of 7 people in the world, not counting the countries in Latin America and elsewhere who already support the moratorium.

However, considering Ron Paul's appeal to both conservatives and liberals, he'll draw votes from Obama and McCain. I'd bet he stands to hurt Obama worse, actually. It's very rare for a third party candidate to come along who can be taken seriously and who stands for issues that are worth voting in favor of (as opposed to simply voting against the two party rule).

I predict McCain wins with 46% of the popular vote. Obama takes 45% and Ron Paul 9%. In other words, gonna be a tight one.

[quote name='Justin86' post='1542876' date='May 26 2008, 02:45 AM']I would imagine his support for it has reached the point of irrelevancy considering how even the scientists who once were strong advocates for government funding have now confessed all hope in stem cell research lies in their adult forms. I'm not sure why this is even an issue in this election.[/quote]

Where have you heard that? Last I checked, there was plenty of research going into embryonic stem cells. Such an important and so-called "promising" area of science with wouldn't just disappear overnight.

Edited May 27, 2008 by LouisvilleFan

[goldenchild17]

If Paul takes that high a percentage I don't see McCain having any chance at all. But that's just me.

[LouisvilleFan]

If Ross Perot can take 19%, it seems reasonable that Ron Paul could manage half that, especially since Paul's clearly a more viable candidate. Granted, Clinton did win the '92 election, but with only 43% of the popular vote.

In the primaries, Paul took 7.4% of the overall vote in Washington, but I checked a few other states and it was more like 1-2%. Still, that's with Clinton, Huckabee, and others who won't be in the November election, and Ron Paul will likely make a bigger splash as the third party option versus one of several Republican options.

It's interesting... but keep in mind, even if Obama wins, it's not the end of the world The pro-life movement can work for Democratic-friendly legislation that encourages single mothers to keep their children by providing the economic or educational help they need, day care programs (though that isn't ideal for raising a child), improved schools, etc. After all, overturning Roe vs. Wade is only one part of this thing. Just because abortion's illegal doesn't mean it ceases to happen, so even more importantly than changing the laws is changing the culture.

[mommas_boy]

[quote name='faithfulrock3r' post='1524376' date='May 10 2008, 08:23 PM']goldenchild17 -
McCain has a record of being pro-life. check it out on the link given in post #1. Thus you're entire argument that he is leading the party towards a pro-choice stance kind of falls apart.[/quote]

In defense of goldenchild17, I would say that according to the link provided above, McCain does not support [b]all[/b] of the non-negotiables that are required of Catholics. Perhaps this is what goldenchild17 had meant. Here is the text below, with the relavant parts bolded:

[quote]* Pro-life and an advocate for the Rights of Man everywhere. (Feb 2008)
* GovWatch: 1999: Don't force women to have illegal operations. (Feb 2008)
* Abortion issue shows what kind of country we are. (Aug 2007)
* Concerned if women undergo illegal dangerous operations. (May 2007)
* Supports federal funding of embryonic stem cell research. (May 2007)
* Prosecute abortion doctors, not women who get them. (Jan 2000)
* “Family Conference” if daughter wanted an abortion. (Jan 2000)
[b]* Abortion OK if raped; and no testing for rape. (Jan 2000)[/b]
* Supports fetal tissue research; against over-intensity. (Jan 2000)
[b]* Overturn Roe v. Wade, but keep incest & rape exceptions. (Jan 2000)[/b]
* Support adoption & foster care; work together on abortion. (Oct 1999)
[b]* Wants Roe vs. Wade made irrelevant, but would not repeal it. (Aug 1999)[/b]
* Opposes partial-birth abortions & public financing. (Aug 1999)
* Nominate justices based on experience, and values. (Jun 1999)
* Restrict abortions; no partial-birth; no public funding. (Jul 1998)
Voting Record
* Supports repealing Roe v. Wade. (May 2007)
* Voted YES on defining unborn child as eligible for SCHIP. (Mar 2008)
* Voted YES on barring HHS grants to organizations that perform abortions. (Oct 2007)
* Voted YES on expanding research to more embryonic stem cell lines. (Apr 2007)
* Voted YES on notifying parents of minors who get out-of-state abortions. (Jul 2006)
* Voted NO on $100M to reduce teen pregnancy by education & contraceptives. (Mar 2005)
* Voted YES on criminal penalty for harming unborn fetus during other crime. (Mar 2004)
* Voted YES on banning partial birth abortions except for maternal life. (Mar 2003)
* Voted YES on maintaining ban on Military Base Abortions. (Jun 2000)
* Voted YES on banning partial birth abortions. (Oct 1999)
* Voted YES on banning human cloning. (Feb 1998)
* Rated 0% by NARAL, indicating a pro-life voting record. (Dec 2003)
[b]* Expand embryonic stem cell research. (Jun 2004)[/b]
[b]* Rated 75% by the NRLC, indicating a mixed record on abortion. (Dec 2006) [/b][/quote]

What is interesting to me to note is that McCain seems to have been falling more in tune with the traditional conservative party line in regard to abortions as time has progressed. Example: he stated that he would not repeal Roe v. Wade in '99, but in 2000 said that he supported it, which his voting record then reflects in 2007. Not sure if I should be encouraged by this change of heart, or if I should be discouraged that he didn't have the courage of his convictions as he started campaigning for the presidency. Interesting.

To be sure, McCain is certainly better than Clinton or Obama.

[goldenchild17]

[quote name='LouisvilleFan' post='1546129' date='May 28 2008, 10:06 AM']If Ross Perot can take 19%, it seems reasonable that Ron Paul could manage half that, especially since Paul's clearly a more viable candidate. Granted, Clinton did win the '92 election, but with only 43% of the popular vote.

In the primaries, Paul took 7.4% of the overall vote in Washington, but I checked a few other states and it was more like 1-2%. Still, that's with Clinton, Huckabee, and others who won't be in the November election, and Ron Paul will likely make a bigger splash as the third party option versus one of several Republican options.[/quote]

I agree. I think that Paul will probably get a noticeable percentage. But I don't think McCain will win if he does. I think in an election year where many are unhappy with what George Bush has done, and less than impressed with the Republican party as a whole, that McCain will need every vote that would normally go to a conservative and I don't think he's going to get that.

[quote name='LouisvilleFan' post='1546129' date='May 28 2008, 10:06 AM']It's interesting... but keep in mind, even if Obama wins, it's not the end of the world The pro-life movement can work for Democratic-friendly legislation that encourages single mothers to keep their children by providing the economic or educational help they need, day care programs (though that isn't ideal for raising a child), improved schools, etc. After all, overturning Roe vs. Wade is only one part of this thing. Just because abortion's illegal doesn't mean it ceases to happen, so even more importantly than changing the laws is changing the culture.[/quote]

I don't know about all that personally. I think it's going to be horrifically bad either way, Obama or McCain.

[goldenchild17]

[quote name='mommas_boy' post='1546472' date='May 28 2008, 01:22 PM']In defense of goldenchild17, I would say that according to the link provided above, McCain does not support [b]all[/b] of the non-negotiables that are required of Catholics. Perhaps this is what goldenchild17 had meant. Here is the text below, with the relavant parts bolded:
What is interesting to me to note is that McCain seems to have been falling more in tune with the traditional conservative party line in regard to abortions as time has progressed. Example: he stated that he would not repeal Roe v. Wade in '99, but in 2000 said that he supported it, which his voting record then reflects in 2007. Not sure if I should be encouraged by this change of heart, or if I should be discouraged that he didn't have the courage of his convictions as he started campaigning for the presidency. Interesting.

To be sure, McCain is certainly better than Clinton or Obama.[/quote]


That's part of it, but not entirely. I don't believe McCain is one to rock the boat. He will do what the majority wants (conservative and liberal). He will come off as trying to be a uniter of parties, which in the whole grand scheme of things is not a bad thing, but will do so at the expense of pro-life policy. He has voted pro-life, but that does not mean that he stands firmly behind and actually believes it to be important. He may not be objectively as bad as Obama, but the fact that he pretends to come off as pro-life can almost be taken as worse. I'd almost prefer an open enemy (Obama) to a wolf in sheep's clothing (McCain) anyday.