All things McCain [Archive] - RonFez.net Messageboard

NewYorkDragons80

07-06-2004, 09:45 PM

McCain Ad for Bush (mms://media4.streamtoyou.com/gwb/FirstChoicedv_256k.wmv)
I think it's an awesome video. Very tasteful. They can't get him for Ground Zero pictures, but I'm sure they'll find something. I wish Bush would dump Cheney in favor of McCain. Now THAT would seal victory.

<marquee>
"To insist on strength is not war-mongering. It is peace-mongering." -Senator Barry M. Goldwater "If gold should rust, what will iron do?" -Geoffrey Chaucer "Worship him, I beg you, in a way that is worthy of thinking beings.-Romans 12:1</marquee>
<img src=http://members.aol.com/cityhawk80/images/nydragonssig.bmp?mtbrand=AOL_US>

TheMojoPin

07-06-2004, 09:52 PM

There's no way McCain would take the VP spot.

He's loyal to the party, but he's pretty anti-Bush himself. He'd never stoop to that level.

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=TheMojoPin">
1979 << December boys got it BAD >> "You can tell some lies about the good times we've had, but I've kissed your mother twice...and now I'm working on your dad..."

42nd-delay

07-06-2004, 09:55 PM

I don't think they get along very well, after the way the Bush camp handled the primary in 2000. McCain's loyalty to the President is born of his loyalty to his party, not to Bush. In any case, Kerry and McCain are friends, so I can't see McCain attacking Kerry, making him an ineffective choice for VP.

------------------------------
"42nd-delay is the only person who's making sense." - Ron, 3-12-02

Doomstone

07-06-2004, 10:13 PM

http://www.democrats.org/mccain/

BTW, your link doesn't work.

<center><img src="http://img1.photobucket.com/albums/0903/snoopy114025/ds2_sig.jpg">
M1 rules!
</center>

HBox

07-06-2004, 10:44 PM

No wonder McCain lost the 2000 primary. Bashing Bush for not funding Social Security and Medicare is gonna go over GREAT with voters in the Republican primary.

http://www.myimgs.com/random/hbox/sig

Yerdaddy

07-07-2004, 08:05 AM

http://www.brocksingleton.com/images/Springer/BSMB3.JPG

DEMS: "Y'all don'trayt John right. If you was takin' care of yo man he wouldn't be comin' round my party, would he, bitch?!

REPS: "Bitch, he mah mayn! Bitch, he mah mayn! Bitch, he mah mayn!"

DEMS: "Then whah y'all be tell evebody he crazy from being in a POW camp, skanky ho?!"

REPS: "Dat ain't none 'yo damn bidness, skeezer! Mind ya bidness! Mind ya bidness! Mind ya bidness"

McCAIN: "I jus loves da bitches, dog!"

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=bonedaddy5">
Fuck it from behind.

curtoid

07-09-2004, 07:39 AM

McCain is a tool - the fact that he let himself get used and manipulated by the same people who smeared him in 2000 suddenly takes the sting out of any 'buyers remorse' people dreaming of a unified ticket would have.

Oh, sure...he's been all over the place, insisting that he would never attack Senator Kerry or Senator Edwards. And through a statement issued through a spokesman he went further, saying he had never been offered the vice presidency by anyone, clearly contradicting the slimey 'First Choice' commercial,. BUt the damage is done.

He is just as skeevy as the rest of "them."

http://img21.photobucket.com/albums/v64/curtoid/44.jpg

"Don't believe everything you read on message boards." - RB

Johnathan H Christ

11-10-2004, 05:03 PM

i was trying to come up with the people i think are the least reprehensable in politics today and thats what i came up with.

id like to see them run on an independant ticket, but i imagine they would do better with republican financing.

anyway... your thoughts?

<IMG SRC=http://members.aol.com/miketeachr/logo width=300 height=100>
SHUT YOUR GODDAMN MANPLEASER
"his very conception was an act of animosity, why shouldnt his entire life be one as well?"

GodsFavoriteMan

11-10-2004, 05:08 PM

Good Republican combo. I wouldn't vote for them (I'm not a Republican) but I wouldn't mind if they won. But, it wouldn't work. They're both too "liberal" for the Christian conservative base.

Then again, Richard Nixon wanted some kind of universal health care. He'd never win these days on that platform.

<img src="http://home.comcast.net/~stan_ferguson/goodluvin_copy.jpg">

Snoogans

11-10-2004, 05:09 PM

But, it wouldn't work. They're both too "liberal" for the Christian conservative base.

it wouldnt work because colin powell is black. im not tryin to be funny or racist, its unfortunate, but i believe that would be the main reason he'd have no chance

http://home.comcast.net/~rmfallon/RFnetSnoogs.jpg
http://snoogans194.blogspot.com/
GO SAWX!!!!!
The worst choke job in the history of sports Snoogans 1, Monitor 0

GodsFavoriteMan

11-10-2004, 05:10 PM

You're probably right, but I'm trying to give the red states a little credit.

<img src="http://home.comcast.net/~stan_ferguson/goodluvin_copy.jpg">

Snoogans

11-10-2004, 05:12 PM

dont, they are nothing but midwestern roobs......ask peachy :p

http://home.comcast.net/~rmfallon/RFnetSnoogs.jpg
http://snoogans194.blogspot.com/
GO SAWX!!!!!
The worst choke job in the history of sports Snoogans 1, Monitor 0

GodsFavoriteMan

11-10-2004, 05:13 PM

I know it, I live in TN. Whoopee! Lucky me!

<img src="http://home.comcast.net/~stan_ferguson/goodluvin_copy.jpg">

canofsoup15

11-10-2004, 05:13 PM

Powell said he would never run for president. Something about his wife and shit, i forget, but i bet someone else here knows.

<img src=http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v124/Canofsoup15/Sigs/ERUZIES1.gif>

<marquee behavior=alternate>
I got the glass, I got the steel. I got the love to hate.
 All I need is your head on stake.</marquee>

HBox

11-10-2004, 05:14 PM

Powell is WHIPPED!

http://www.myimgs.com/random/hbox/sig

This message was edited by HBox on 11-10-04 @ 9:21 PM

DJEvelEd

11-10-2004, 05:18 PM

Powell is WHIPPED!

http://www.myimgs.com/random/hbox/sig

His Great Great Grandpappy too...

<img src="http://64.177.177.182/katylina/originoffeces.jpg">
PUTTING THE FUNNY IN PRESENTLY SEEN DEPTHS
SPONSORED BY: "THE F’CESTOF C’SAR" BY ’SOP c464 B.C.
HAS ANYONE SEEN MY BIG WET GAPING ’NUS FILLED WITH DIARRH’?

Tenbatsuzen

11-10-2004, 05:21 PM

I have two black co-workers... One of them is one of the friendliest, non-threatening black men you'll ever meet (Think Will Smith), and the other is a very, very, very, very, very, very...

very...

very...

very...

ANGRY black man.

Both agree that we'll see a woman president before we'll ever see a black president.

<center><img src="http://s95227862.onlinehome.us/sigs/chadsig1.jpg"></center>

Snoogans

11-10-2004, 05:22 PM

i would never vote for a woman. no offense, im sure for like 27 days a month she'd be a great president. But id fear the one PMS morning when her husband left the seat up.

WATCH OUT CANADA

http://home.comcast.net/~rmfallon/RFnetSnoogs.jpg
http://snoogans194.blogspot.com/
GO SAWX!!!!!
The worst choke job in the history of sports Snoogans 1, Monitor 0

Teenweek

11-10-2004, 05:39 PM

Mccain/Giuliani seems more likely or vice versa vs Hillary and Obama?

Snoogans

11-10-2004, 05:41 PM

ROSS PEROT

http://home.comcast.net/~rmfallon/RFnetSnoogs.jpg
http://snoogans194.blogspot.com/
GO SAWX!!!!!
The worst choke job in the history of sports Snoogans 1, Monitor 0

Heather 8

11-10-2004, 05:42 PM

dont, they are nothing but midwestern roobs......ask peachy :p

Ah na na... my state came up blue this time, biatch! ;)

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v294/RFPeachy/RFnetPeachy.jpg
Thanks WWFallon!

You can be disappointed, but you cannot walk away. This fight has just begun.

GodsFavoriteMan

11-10-2004, 05:44 PM

I wouldn't be surprised with an attempt at a Bush dynasty with Jeb Bush running in '08. But I think people might find that too disturbing. As for the democrats. . .I dunno, they're hurting right now, first they have to get their base back.

<img src="http://home.comcast.net/~stan_ferguson/goodluvin_copy.jpg">

Yerdaddy

11-10-2004, 05:46 PM

Powell would then have to explain that bullshit UN Security Council presentation on Iraq. But then his base wouldn't care anyway.

I think the only way a black person or a woman is going to get elected president is if they're republican. Republicans will vote for them if only to hold them up as proof they aren't bigots and as the only device they have to attract minority voters, but when blacks and women are democrats they assume affirmative action and thus the person is unqualified - or that they will favor their own race or gener at the expense of whites or males.

NOTE: Yes, this is a broad generalization about republicans. It is not meant to suggest ALL republicans think this way, and maybe not even the majority. But in the context of presidential politics, where the most petty and superficial aspects of a candidate can make the difference between winning and losing, the generalizations are enough to make candidates unelectable from the democratic party.

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=bonedaddy5">
Fuck it from behind.

Snoogans

11-10-2004, 05:48 PM

DISCLAIMER???

what a sissy girl

http://home.comcast.net/~rmfallon/RFnetSnoogs.jpg
http://snoogans194.blogspot.com/
GO SAWX!!!!!
The worst choke job in the history of sports Snoogans 1, Monitor 0

Johnathan H Christ

11-10-2004, 05:54 PM

i didnt think it was gonna turn into blacks in office or women. these are all things that for one reason or another people want to latch on to.

the fact that they're both republican, i guess i was also thinking who's not going to be a religious crazy, cause it really looks like thats the way the republican party is headed.

i just figured that all the red states would keep on being red (around the necks) and just vote republican anyway.

<IMG SRC=http://members.aol.com/miketeachr/logo width=300 height=100>
SHUT YOUR GODDAMN MANPLEASER
"his very conception was an act of animosity, why shouldnt his entire life be one as well?"

Recyclerz

11-10-2004, 05:56 PM

Powell said he would never run for president. Something about his wife and shit, i forget, but i bet someone else here knows.

Right you are, COS. His wife has been treated for depression and, reportedly, he didn't run for president because he didn't want her dragged through the mud because of her condition. Given the dirty tricks guys who earn a nice living in today's politics I can't say he didn't make the right decision. :(

<IMG SRC="http://www.hometown.aol.com/recyclerz/myhomepage/sigpic1.gif?mtbrand=AOL_US">
[b]Rooting for the Rapture to happen soon, so I can have my country back.[b]

badorties

11-10-2004, 06:14 PM

i would never vote for a woman. no offense, im sure for like 27 days a month she'd be a great president. But id fear the one PMS morning when her husband left the seat up.

more than likely, any woman running for the presidency might past her menstruating days ... at worst, we'll have to deal with hot flashes and all the fun menopause brings ...

how about McCain/ Powell in 08?

maybe as on an independent or third party ticket ...

i doubt we'll see any ethnic types or females on either ticket ...

after the last two elections, i see each side getting more entrenched with the party line and playing things close to the vest ...

2008 run will be a freefall at first with all types making a bid or eun for the title ... but when it's all said and done, each party will have as the presidential candidate: a white protestant male; former or active govenor and from a southern or midwestern state) ... with a swing state senator as VP ... the only wild card is a hispanic for the 7 million latino votes

no powell (too black)
no mccain (too old for VP)
no hillary (too girly, also part of the old mcaulif regime that might be out as head of the DNC)
no pataki (too NY, and not conservative enough)
no guillani (won't even run, probably govenor already)
no obama (too young, maybe 2012 or 2016)
no edwards (had his chance)
no arnold (the fact that hatch is pushing to alter the constitution for this manianc is disgusting)

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=badorties"> 

+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+

curtoid

11-10-2004, 06:39 PM

2008 run will be a freefall at first with all types making a bid or eun for the title ... but when it's all said and done, each party will have as the presidential candidate: a white protestant male; former or active govenor and from a southern or midwestern state) ... with a swing state senator as VP ... the only wild card is a hispanic for the 7 million latino votes

no powell (too black)
no mccain (too old for VP)
no hillary (too girly, also part of the old mcaulif regime that might be out as head of the DNC)
no pataki (too NY, and not conservative enough)
no guillani (won't even run, probably govenor already)
no obama (too young, maybe 2012 or 2016)
no edwards (had his chance)
no arnold (the fact that hatch is pushing to alter the constitution for this manianc is disgusting)

Good summary. I could see Pataki and Obama part of a ticket, but not just the top.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v64/curtoid/sourgrapes.jpg
Welcome to the Big Brother House of Shun

JohnnyCash

11-10-2004, 06:46 PM

Im a big fan of McCain but I dont think Powell would be a good running mate.

<img src=http://www.christpuncherrecords.com/sigs/cash_monster.jpg>
Thank you Freakshow.

TheMojoPin

11-10-2004, 08:16 PM

Like it was said, Republicans will actually vote in a Republican black or woman president before Democrats would.

Republicans are loyal. For the most part, they vote for ANYONE running under the Republican banner. This honestly isn't meant as a slam...their party has been refined to appeal to ANY level conservative, and that's why they win elections. Democrats can't even get all liberals to vote for them.

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=TheMojoPin">
1979 <> "You can tell some lies about the good times we've had, but I've kissed your mother twice...and now I'm working on your dad..."

reeshy

11-10-2004, 08:23 PM

Shit.....if Mojo was a Rublican...I'd vote for him!!!!!

[center]<IMG SRC="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=reeshy">
[center]

GodsFavoriteMan

11-10-2004, 08:34 PM

Rublican

That sounds so hot. That'd get my vote.

<img src="http://home.comcast.net/~stan_ferguson/goodluvin_copy.jpg">

Mike Teacher

11-11-2004, 03:41 AM

in This World four years is eternity, and combining asymptotic growth with contingency: when Gore lost in 2000; I was into the AOL Political Chats and when everyone in the world was saying, 'just wait til Gore gets revenge in 2004' I said, he wont be there, and they had no idea what I was talking about.

When Howard Dean was The Man I told R+F on-air, no way will this guy ever see the nomination. Months are eternities in politics.

Next thing ya know Yassar Arafat will keel over and d...FUCK!!! See?

<IMG SRC="http://members.aol.com/miketeachr/esig">

NewYorkDragons80

11-11-2004, 03:43 AM

They're both too "liberal" for the Christian conservative base.
I can't stress this enough: MCCAIN IS A CONSERVATIVE. The only issues that he is liberal on are issues that aren't exactly near and dear to the Christian right. IMO, the nomination is McCain's if he wants it.

<marquee>
"To insist on strength is not war-mongering. It is peace-mongering." -Senator Barry M. Goldwater "If gold should rust, what will iron do?" -Geoffrey Chaucer "Worship him, I beg you, in a way that is worthy of thinking beings.-Romans 12:1</marquee>
<img src=http://members.aol.com/cityhawk80/images/nydragonssig.bmp?mtbrand=AOL_US>

curtoid

11-11-2004, 04:05 AM

IMO, the nomination is McCain's if he wants it.

Unless the neo-cons have their way - did you forget about 2000? They will hand pick their candidate (Jeb Bush or George Allen) and then put all of the resources they had to put Dubya in office behind that guy, and heaven help any Republican moderate or true conservative that says "Boo."

They will tear him apart like they did before. Besides being too old for many, McCain is just a wildcard that they can't control - the neo-cons can not trust that he will tow the party line.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v64/curtoid/sourgrapes.jpg
Welcome to the Big Brother House of Shun

AppleBoy

11-11-2004, 04:17 AM

I'd vote for McCain again.

<IMG SRC="http://www.myimgs.com/random/appleboy/AppleBoySigs">

shamus mcfitzy

11-11-2004, 07:12 AM

i'd have no problem with that ticket, which is why it can't happen. I've said before that I choose ideology over electibility, but considering the political climate will not allow a real liberal to win the presidency, I put liking a person then above ideology. I like McCain, and if he were running I would actually {gasp} vote. I'd at least feel that NY would be swayed enough for my vote to maybe count.

I wouldn't be surprised with an attempt at a Bush dynasty with Jeb Bush running in '08.

I'd think they would've already tried it. Everything I read says that he is more like his father (read more presidential and "smart") and that he should've been the Bush son that should be president. I think a lot of it might be that he's named Jeb. He should've switched it with whatever his middle name was, ala Eisenhower and others (although i think it'd be the first time that a name was changed just for electibility).

And I thought he was actually the eldest son. I know it don't make sense that then W got the namesake, but I thought I read that. That just doesn't make sense if there would be a Bush dynasty.

DarkHippie

11-11-2004, 11:12 AM

Ah na na... my state came up blue this time, biatch!
Does that mean it's pregnant?

<IMG SRC=http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v124/Canofsoup15/Sigs/HippieRat.jpg>
<marquee> Check out DarkHippie's latest story, "Keeper", at http://home.pcisys.net/~drmforge/dftoc2.htm </marquee>

A.J.

11-11-2004, 01:14 PM

Rublican

Isn't that the thing Caesar crossed?

<img src=http://img40.photobucket.com/albums/v124/Canofsoup15/Sigs/AJinDC-Sig.jpg>

A Skidmark/canofsoup15 production.

Red Sox Nation

TheMojoPin

11-11-2004, 02:36 PM

TOP OF THE GEEK PYRAMID.

Well played, sir. My wizard's hat is off to you.

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=TheMojoPin">
1979 <> "You can tell some lies about the good times we've had, but I've kissed your mother twice...and now I'm working on your dad..."

NewYorkDragons80

11-13-2004, 09:29 PM

IMO, the nomination is McCain's if he wants it.
Unless the neo-cons have their way - did you forget about 2000?... the neo-cons can not trust that he will tow the party line.
Do you even know what a neo-con is? On issues of national defense, he is a rank and file neo-con and had some of his key support in 2000 from neo-cons like Kristol.

<marquee>
"To insist on strength is not war-mongering. It is peace-mongering." -Senator Barry M. Goldwater "If gold should rust, what will iron do?" -Geoffrey Chaucer "Worship him, I beg you, in a way that is worthy of thinking beings.-Romans 12:1</marquee>
<img src=http://members.aol.com/cityhawk80/images/nydragonssig.bmp?mtbrand=AOL_US>

curtoid

11-14-2004, 05:00 AM

IMO, the nomination is McCain's if he wants it.
Unless the neo-cons have their way - did you forget about 2000?... the neo-cons can not trust that he will tow the party line.
Do you even know what a neo-con is? On issues of national defense, he is a rank and file neo-con and had some of his key support in 2000 from neo-cons like Kristol.

Yes I do - and I stand by my comments.

Despite how well he pretends to play nice with them, they know he is a loose cannon and can't be manipulated. Nation building and war for the benefit of corporate interest is not in his DNA. Maybe he can convince them of that in the next four years, but my guess is that they are already eyeing someone else.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v64/curtoid/sourgrapes.jpg
Welcome to the Big Brother House of Shun

NewYorkDragons80

11-14-2004, 05:12 AM

Yes I do - and I stand by my comments.

Despite how well he pretends to play nice with them, they know he is a loose cannon and can't be manipulated. Nation building and war for the benefit of corporate interest is not in his DNA. Maybe he can convince them of that in the next four years, but my guess is that they are already eyeing someone else.
McCain is from the Wolfowitz wing of neo-conservatism that removing a dictator solely for want of democracy is justified. I personally have no problem with this view so long as it is controlled. And in McCain's case, it is controlled.
We did not go into Bosnia because Mr. Milosevic had weapons of mass destruction. We did not go into Kosovo because ethnic Albanians or others were somehow a threat to the security of the United States. We entered into those conflicts because we could not stand by and watch innocent men, women, and children being slaughtered, raped, and "ethnically cleansed.''
I believe that, obviously, we will remove a threat to America's national security because we will find there are still massive amounts of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Although Theodore Roosevelt is my hero and role model, I also, in many ways, am Wilsonian in the respect that America, this great nation of ours, will again contribute to the freedom and liberty of an oppressed people who otherwise never might enjoy those freedoms.
A-fuckin-men.
-National Review (http://www.nationalreview.com/document/document032003b.asp)

<marquee>
"To insist on strength is not war-mongering. It is peace-mongering." -Senator Barry M. Goldwater "If gold should rust, what will iron do?" -Geoffrey Chaucer "Worship him, I beg you, in a way that is worthy of thinking beings.-Romans 12:1</marquee>
<img src=http://members.aol.com/cityhawk80/images/nydragonssig.bmp?mtbrand=AOL_US>

This message was edited by NewYorkDragons80 on 11-14-04 @ 9:14 AM

HBox

03-29-2006, 06:58 PM

I guess this was inevitbale, he tried to run the right way once and failed. I guess he just wants to really become President. This isn't the first story of this kind I've read, and I'm sure it won't be the last.<a href="http://www.newsadvance.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=LNA/MGArticle/LNA_BasicArticle&c=MGArticle&cid=1137834984968&path=" target="_blank">Link here.</a> U.S.
Sen. John McCain - a likely 2008 presidential candidate who once
labeled the Rev. Jerry Falwell an “agent of intolerance” - will be
Liberty University’s graduation speaker on May 13.
“I
was in Washington with him about three months ago,” Falwell said. “We
dealt with every difference we have. There are no deal breakers now.
But I told him, ‘You have a lot of fence mending to do.’”...
McCain’s
visit to the LU campus is, at the very least, an attempt to make peace
with conservative Christians prior to the presidential campaign.
While
running against then- Gov. George W. Bush in the South Carolina and
Virginia primaries in 2000, McCain denounced Falwell and Virginia Beach
televangelist Pat Robertson in what was seen as a move to lure more
moderate voters to his campaign.
“Neither
party should be defined by pandering to the outer reaches of American
politics and the agents of intolerance, whether they be Louis Farrakhan
or Al Sharpton on the left or Pat Robertson or Jerry Falwell on the
right,” McCain said at the time....
Falwell
said McCain has expressed a willingness to support a Federal Marriage
Amendment, an issue dear to conservative Christians.
The amendment would define marriage as a union between one man and one woman.
Christian
conservatives, including Falwell, are concerned about efforts by
homosexual groups to have civil unions between same-sex partners
recognized as marriages. McCain previously has said the matter of
defining marriage should be handled by state legislatures, but now
concedes that a federal statute may be necessary, Falwell said.

ADF

03-29-2006, 07:21 PM

Well, there goes any hope of me voting for him.  I guess it's straight democrat down the line once more.

Tenbatsuzen

03-29-2006, 11:38 PM

One thing of note, there's absolutely no quotes or anything from McCain in that article.Just saying. And ADF - Giuliani?

Bulldogcakes

03-30-2006, 02:04 AM

I wouldn't read too much into that. Its just smart politically. What he personally believes and what he may need to do for political reasons may be very different. He is widely viewed as a moderate, and that hurts him in the primary process. He'll need to turn Right from now through mid 2008. He is more conservative than some people seem to think he is (Very pro-life) so it's something he can do credibly, but many Republican base voters dont trust him, since he has so publicly opposed Bush and aligned himself w/Democrats on certain issues. That being said, McCain wont win targeting core Bush voters. He'll need alot of the Republican base, but he should focus on building a new coalition with alot of moderates. Which he will, he just cant do it yet.

Bulldogcakes

03-30-2006, 02:43 AM

BTW-HBox, since Hillary has been making some more conservative statements lately, shouldn't you also post a thread about how the "Myth of Hillary" is exploding? Isn't this all just politics as usual?

curtoid

03-30-2006, 05:29 AM

Bulldogcakes wrote: BTW-HBox, since Hillary has been making some more conservative statements lately, shouldn't you also post a thread about how the "Myth of Hillary" is exploding? Isn't this all just politics as usual? Not really.The myth is that many moderate democrats always kind of liked McCain, and felt that if they had to have a Republican President, they could support him. Hell, they were even willing to let Kerry pick him as a running mate, and not even change parties! On a myopic level, I saw this with my mother back in 2000, and she never voted for a Republican. On a more obvious scene, McCain is a disappointment because he was always so proud of not being "politics as usual."There is no such public perception with Hillary among moderate Republicans, although the real myth about Senator Clinton is that she is universally hated among Republicans - she actually isn't. She may be liked by some, but she's hardly held in the same league with them as McCain has been with the other side. A lot of that may be the internal pressure, because of the very strong, very vocal, very insecure element that loathes her to the very core, and always will no matter how conservative she may suddenly find herself being. There is no such faction among the left with McCain, where his name would make Democrats red faced and stupid - in fact, he is one of the few Republicans these days that hadn't elicit those responses from the left's reactionary element. Anyway, I know this was addressed to hbox, but I felt the need to add my stupid two cents in - basically the games being played are the same, but at different stages - Hillary is playing it as if she has the nomination - she's banking on the liberal base to back her, no matter what (which might be a mistake), so it frees her up to make early play for the middle ground - McCain does not have the Conservative base in his party sewn up, which he will need for the primaries, so he has to prove that he really is one of "them" - and then he's hoping that he can then move enough in the middle in time for the election to bring back some of the libs that loved him so much that at one time they begged him to change parties. The other major simularity is that neither is fooling anyone - Conservatives, in the end, really won't be so lulled into suddenly believing McCain is more Bush and less Reagan. I still think he can win the nomination, but I think it's going to be a dog fight (with someone like George Allen). And if he does, enough of the democrats or indies that dug him may be turned off not to vote for him - unless he's running against Hillary, which (also) isn't going to win any Conservatives or right leaning indies with her new talk, and may end up turning off enough of her assumed base that her primary season might be tougher than they are planning - I'd put money on another former Virignia Gov., Mark Warner, to give her a fight.Ugh----head hurts----always fall into same talks---why thinking of this in 2006?

Yerdaddy

03-30-2006, 06:35 AM

curtoid wrote: Ugh----head hurts----always fall into same talks---why thinking of this in 2006?Hell, I crap bigger posts than that!

HBox

03-30-2006, 10:37 AM

Bulldogcakes wrote: BTW-HBox, since Hillary has been making some more conservative statements lately, shouldn't you also post a thread about how the "Myth of Hillary" is exploding? Isn't this all just politics as usual?   Was there ever a "myth" of Hlllary? McCain always had this persona that seemed to attract voters from all sides. Hillary was NEVER like that.

Tenbatsuzen

03-30-2006, 12:53 PM

HBox wrote:  Bulldogcakes wrote: BTW-HBox, since Hillary has been making some more conservative statements lately, shouldn't you also post a thread about how the "Myth of Hillary" is exploding? Isn't this all just politics as usual?   Was there ever a "myth" of Hlllary? McCain always had this persona that seemed to attract voters from all sides. Hillary was NEVER like that.  I am really intrigued by the potential of the Hilary vs. McCain/Giuliani smackdown that'll happen in 2008.

Bulldogcakes

03-30-2006, 03:46 PM

HBox wrote: Bulldogcakes wrote: BTW-HBox, since Hillary has been making some more conservative statements lately, shouldn't you also post a thread about how the "Myth of Hillary" is exploding? Isn't this all just politics as usual? Was there ever a "myth" of Hlllary? McCain always had this persona that seemed to attract voters from all sides. Hillary was NEVER like that.  I'll start from the beginning, since no one seemed to get my last post. You post this thread about how the "myth of McCain" is disintegrating because he's meeting with Falwell, etc. So I counter by saying Hillary is doing the same sort of repositioning (BTW-Curtoid its exactly the same, she's addresssing her weakness, McCains addressing his). Do you really believe that Hillary is any less of a liberal because of her recent statements? Do you think any of Hillary's positions have really changed, or is she just repositioning herself for political reasons? BTW-Which worked for Bill, but wont for her. The critcism of Bill was always he had no core beliefs. So he could reinvent himself at will. Hillary is seen as (and is) much more ideologically entrenched. Plus she has ZERO of Bills innate charm, which was another reason he got away with murder. <blockquote />  Point is, if you understand why Hillary is doing it, understand why McCain is. No myth is gone here, he's still the same man. Just doing what he has to do at this point.

HBox

03-30-2006, 04:10 PM

Bulldogcakes wrote: HBox wrote: Bulldogcakes wrote: BTW-HBox, since Hillary has been making some more conservative statements lately, shouldn't you also post a thread about how the "Myth of Hillary" is exploding? Isn't this all just politics as usual? Was there ever a "myth" of Hlllary? McCain always had this persona that seemed to attract voters from all sides. Hillary was NEVER like that. I'll start from the beginning, since no one seemed to get my last post. You post this thread about how the "myth of McCain" is disintegrating because he's meeting with Falwell, etc. So I counter by saying Hillary is doing the same sort of repositioning (BTW-Curtoid its exactly the same, she's addresssing her weakness, McCains addressing his). Do you really believe that Hillary is any less of a liberal because of her recent statements? Do you think any of Hillary's positions have really changed, or is she just repositioning herself for political reasons? BTW-Which worked for Bill, but wont for her. The critcism of Bill was always he had no core beliefs. So he could reinvent himself at will. Hillary is seen as (and is) much more ideologically entrenched. Plus she has ZERO of Bills innate charm, which was another reason he got away with murder. Point is, if you understand why Hillary is doing it, understand why McCain is. No myth is gone here, he's still the same man. Just doing what he has to do at this point.   Hillary was never the left-wing caricature she was portrayed by right-wingers. And I don't want her to get the nomination, and would probably go third-party before voting for her in the general. I'm not giving her any leeway. In my universe she's been gone for a while. She went hard right way before any of this stuff happened with McCain. There's a whole host of things she's done, longer than waht McCain has done lately. So I don't understand or accept what Hillary has done. At this point I hope Warner, Edwards or Feingold get the nomination, but that is a long way off, and lot's of shit happens in that time. McCain doing this stuff, however, was more of a surprise. Hence, the thread.

Bulldogcakes

03-30-2006, 04:17 PM

McCain doing this stuff, however, was more of a surprise. Hence, the thread.I'll grant you that. But thats only because he starts out with more credibility than any of the rest. But he still has to operate in the real world, not my and your fantasy (the one where he tells Falwell to piss off) so I understand why he's doing it and think no less of him.

HBox

03-30-2006, 07:28 PM

Bulldogcakes wrote: McCain doing this stuff, however, was more of a surprise. Hence, the thread. I'll grant you that. But thats only because he starts out with more credibility than any of the rest. But he still has to operate in the real world, not my and your fantasy (the one where he tells Falwell to piss off) so I understand why he's doing it and think no less of him.  Well he didn't do it last time. He called Falwell for what he is, and that's one of the reason's I respected him. If he decides some of his beliefs are less important than becoming President, well, then he's just another very conservative politician who doesn't stand for much of what I believe in.

HBox

04-02-2006, 04:00 PM

McCain was on Meet The Press this morning. I am not encouraged with what he had to say about this, although I'm glad he said what he did about Putin and Russia.

WRESTLINGFAN

05-14-2006, 06:35 AM

At one time he called people like Jerry Falwell the religious right.  McCain is popular even with alot of democrats, republicans say he's too liberal, i think hes trying to get more of a base for a run for the oval office in '08, will this hurt his chances with the swing voters? <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060514/ap_on_el_pr/mccain_5">http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060514/ap_on_el_pr/mccain_5</a>

trackstand

05-14-2006, 08:05 AM

Fuckin Putz!

furie

05-14-2006, 04:58 PM

eh, i'm not phased. i still like the guy.

Bulldogcakes

05-14-2006, 06:47 PM

He always was Conservative (an almost perfect pro-life voting record), the difference between him and most other Conservatives is 1) He's not nasty and angry all the time 2) He has the balls to stand against his party on matters of principle. Most Conservatives follow the party leader mindlessly. 3) He is actually LIKED by the media, because he has a sense of humor.  He's doing the Falwell thing because Falwell torpedoed his last bid, and he wants to avoid that in his current run. I still doubt that Falwell will endorse him, but maybe this buys him a truce with the guy. Which may be all he needs to get the party nod. I still think that he hasn't changed one bit, and people shouldn't distrust him for speaking to them. Just because he speaks to them doesn't mean he agrees with them.

Fallon

05-14-2006, 08:10 PM

trackstand wrote: Fuckin Putz!

Yeah! What was Seattle thinking drafting this guy?

http://home.comcast.net/~bob80/putz.jpg

PapaBear

05-14-2006, 09:25 PM

Falwell torpedoed his last bidDon't say "torpedoed". It makes McCain nervous...<img src="http://www.dcfp.navy.mil/graphics/forrestal1.jpg" border="0" />Ok.. it was a missle, not a torpedo.

pennington

05-16-2006, 10:21 AM

Bulldogcakes wrote: He's doing the Falwell thing because Falwell torpedoed his last bid, and he wants to avoid that in his current run. I still doubt that Falwell will endorse him, but maybe this buys him a truce with the guy. Which may be all he needs to get the party nod. After McCain did well in New Hampshire, the newspapers were annointing him.  He was feeling bold and he compared Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson to Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson. Right before the big southern bloc of primaries.  He got slaughtered; it was the end of his Presidential run.You can be sure he won't make that mistake again.

Furtherman

05-16-2006, 10:36 AM

pennington wrote: After McCain did well in New Hampshire, the newspapers were annointing him.  He was feeling bold and he compared Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson to Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson. Right before the big southern bloc of primaries.  He got slaughtered; it was the end of his Presidential run.You can be sure he won't make that mistake again.Sounds like a good comparison to me.I like McCain a lot, and I can see he's gotta do the "make nice" bullshit, but if the christian conservatives piggy back on his campaign even half as much as they did Bush, he'll lose my vote.

Bulldogcakes

05-16-2006, 04:12 PM

I doubt they will. The Republican Base doesn't trust McCain because the media likes him, and he's been off the reservation on high profile issues. But if it McCain vs Hillary (most likely ticket as of now), they'll RUN to the polls to vote for him, or Howdy Doody, or whoever's running against Hillary.

Bulldogcakes

05-16-2006, 04:21 PM

BTWThe title of this thread bugs me. <a href="http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2002/how-liberal-is-john-mccain/" target="_self" title="Read this">Read this</a> However, McCain’s voting record is not
out of step with many other Republicans in the Senate. His lifetime
rating from the American Conservative Union is an 85, the same as Orrin
Hatch’s lifetime rating. Hatch is not exactly considered a moderate or
liberal Republican.

TheMojoPin

05-16-2006, 07:43 PM

"John McCain goes neo-con" would be more accurate.

newport king

05-16-2006, 08:14 PM

if you actually READ what he said it wasn't bad. He basically said people have the right to disagree on issues. i see nothing wrong with that.

Yerdaddy

05-17-2006, 06:05 AM

I think the important question is: what does it say about the American public that, in order to run for president, these are the kinds of pieces of shit you have to suck up to? Even if, like McCain, you have huge support among what's left of the "middle"?

Bulldogcakes

05-17-2006, 03:26 PM

You have to run through the fruitcake gauntlet to get TO the general election. Its the primary process, where less people vote so small segmants of the population that vote often have more sway. Its not so bad. Minority interests should be able to affect the process, its healthy for the country that everyone has an avenue to influence. I'd like to see him build a new "Teddy Roosevelt" style coalition, but you can only do that in the general election. The primaries are filled with yahoos. I should know, I used to vote in primaries when I was a yahoo myself.

HBox

05-25-2006, 12:25 AM

<a href="http://www.observer.com/printpage.asp?iid=12874&ic=News%20Story%201" target="_blank">McCain's straight talk.</a>  In a small, mirror-paneled room guarded by
a Secret Service agent and packed with some of the city’s wealthiest
and most influential political donors, Mr. McCain got right to the
point.
*>
*>“One of the things I would do if I were President would be to sit
the Shiites and the Sunnis down and say, ‘Stop the bullshit,’” said Mr.
McCain, according to Shirley Cloyes DioGuardi, an invitee, and two
other guests. According to my sources, here's McCain's Brilliant Backup Plan: "No seriously, stop the bullshit." And his backup backup plan, because he is THAT thorough: "COME ON!!!!! QUIT IT GUYS!!!!!! AWWW MMMMMMAAAAAANNNNNN!!!!!!!!"  <a href="http://www.ronfez.net/messageboard/editmessage.cfm/Forum/87/Topic/50176/Message/%3Cblockquote%3E%3Chr%20color="> </a>

This message was edited by HBox on 5-25-06 @ 4:27 AM

pennington

05-25-2006, 11:25 AM

HBox wrote: According to my sources, here's McCain's Brilliant Backup Plan: "No seriously, stop the bullshit." And his backup backup plan, because he is THAT thorough: "COME ON!!!!! QUIT IT GUYS!!!!!! AWWW MMMMMMAAAAAANNNNNN!!!!!!!!" My favorite post of the month.I also like how McCain put-down Rush Limbaugh, Lou Dobbs and Michael Savage when he was in NY. After he bent over to get Jerry Falwell's approval for a similar stupid remark in 2003.  This is why conservatives (and I'm not one of them) don't trust him and won't support him even if he gets the nomination.

HBox

11-02-2006, 07:44 PM

<a href="http://www.tpmcafe.com/blog/electioncentral/2006/nov/02/mccain_stars_in_az_same_sex_marriage_amendment_ads" target="_blank">So, yeah, John McCain can go fuck himself.</a>

narc

11-02-2006, 08:12 PM

If  you're going to oppose gay marriage, this is the way to do it. At least he isn't backing a national amendment to the big constitution, which would be stupid. Other than that, how is this different than just pure politics? Bill Clinton doesn't fucking support gay marriage either. You're acting pissed because he's not acting like a liberal dem. McCain has always been an independent Republican. And he basically still is. There's no way I'm not voting for him in the next election.(I wrote him in in 2000).

HBox

11-02-2006, 10:04 PM

narc wrote: If you're going to oppose gay marriage, this is the way to do it. At least he isn't backing a national amendment to the big constitution, which would be stupid. Other than that, how is this different than just pure politics? Bill Clinton doesn't fucking support gay marriage either. You're acting pissed because he's not acting like a liberal dem. McCain has always been an independent Republican. And he basically still is. There's no way I'm not voting for him in the next election.(I wrote him in in 2000).   The only reason I was ever interested in him as a candidate is because he eschewed all that "pure politics" stuff. This proposal goes farther then just stopping gays from being married and he knows it. It's just his latest attempt to try and win over the religious right. My politics never lined up with his but I always respected him for not bowing to the religious nuts. I would have considered voting for him if there was another lousy Democrat candidate. Now he is repeatedly courting the religious nuts. So screw him if he's gonna choose the GWB path.

narc

11-02-2006, 10:41 PM

HBox wrote: narc wrote: If you're going to oppose gay marriage, this is the way to do it. At least he isn't backing a national amendment to the big constitution, which would be stupid. Other than that, how is this different than just pure politics? Bill Clinton doesn't fucking support gay marriage either. You're acting pissed because he's not acting like a liberal dem. McCain has always been an independent Republican. And he basically still is. There's no way I'm not voting for him in the next election.(I wrote him in in 2000). The only reason I was ever interested in him as a candidate is because he eschewed all that "pure politics" stuff. This proposal goes farther then just stopping gays from being married and he knows it. It's just his latest attempt to try and win over the religious right. My politics never lined up with his but I always respected him for not bowing to the religious nuts. I would have considered voting for him if there was another lousy Democrat candidate. Now he is repeatedly courting the religious nuts. So screw him if he's gonna choose the GWB path.    Every President has to sort of kowtow to those people. It's just a matter of how you do it.Bush talks about God a lot - but as Ron has said repeatedly -when was the last time you saw him actually at Church? Whereas Bill Clinton never talked about God, but made sure nearly weekly he was photographed coming out of some sort of Church.I think that what you, me and a lot of other people fear is too much of the religious nut stuff working its way into policy, and I don't see a state gay marriage ban as being specifically a religious thing insofar as that there are a lot of non-religious people who also support it. We don't really know what McCain would be like as President as far as that goes. I see what he's been doing so far as the bare minimum he can get away with to turn some of the wacko vote around in his favor while maintaining his credibility. But in his other actions on the hill, he's never been one to shy away from confrontation with the other Republicans.

HBox

11-02-2006, 10:47 PM

narc wrote: HBox wrote: narc wrote: If you're going to oppose gay marriage, this is the way to do it. At least he isn't backing a national amendment to the big constitution, which would be stupid. Other than that, how is this different than just pure politics? Bill Clinton doesn't fucking support gay marriage either. You're acting pissed because he's not acting like a liberal dem. McCain has always been an independent Republican. And he basically still is. There's no way I'm not voting for him in the next election.(I wrote him in in 2000). The only reason I was ever interested in him as a candidate is because he eschewed all that "pure politics" stuff. This proposal goes farther then just stopping gays from being married and he knows it. It's just his latest attempt to try and win over the religious right. My politics never lined up with his but I always respected him for not bowing to the religious nuts. I would have considered voting for him if there was another lousy Democrat candidate. Now he is repeatedly courting the religious nuts. So screw him if he's gonna choose the GWB path. Every President has to sort of kowtow to those people. It's just a matter of how you do it.Bush talks about God a lot - but as Ron has said repeatedly -when was the last time you saw him actually at Church? Whereas Bill Clinton never talked about God, but made sure nearly weekly he was photographed coming out of some sort of Church.I think that what you, me and a lot of other people fear is too much of the religious nut stuff working its way into policy, and I don't see a state gay marriage ban as being specifically a religious thing insofar as that there are a lot of non-religious people who also support it. We don't really know what McCain would be like as President as far as that goes. I see what he's been doing so far as the bare minimum he can get away with to turn some of the wacko vote around in his favor while maintaining his credibility. But in his other actions on the hill, he's never been one to shy away from confrontation with the other Republicans.   Like on torture when he rasied a stink for a couple weeks and then folded and gave Bush everything he wanted anyway?There's much more going on with him than just this story, I'm sure people who agree more with his political views will have different opinions about all this but I at least had faith that he was his own man. He's backing off that and I'm left with few, if any, reasons to support him.

FUNKMAN

11-02-2006, 10:54 PM

i once had the perception that McCain was a "tough/his own man" type most likely due to his veteran status. then there was an incident where he spoke out against the president, not sure specifically what it was but just a few days later he was at some event with the president and the president was telling him where to stand and it looked like an owner telling his dog what to do. maybe it's because mccain is short, i don't know...it really looked like bush was purposely humiliating mccain in public due to what he said

keithy_19

11-02-2006, 11:12 PM

I'd vote for Liberman over McCain.

narc

11-03-2006, 12:01 AM

HBox wrote: narc wrote: HBox wrote: narc wrote: If you're going to oppose gay marriage, this is the way to do it. At least he isn't backing a national amendment to the big constitution, which would be stupid. Other than that, how is this different than just pure politics? Bill Clinton doesn't fucking support gay marriage either. You're acting pissed because he's not acting like a liberal dem. McCain has always been an independent Republican. And he basically still is. There's no way I'm not voting for him in the next election.(I wrote him in in 2000). The only reason I was ever interested in him as a candidate is because he eschewed all that "pure politics" stuff. This proposal goes farther then just stopping gays from being married and he knows it. It's just his latest attempt to try and win over the religious right. My politics never lined up with his but I always respected him for not bowing to the religious nuts. I would have considered voting for him if there was another lousy Democrat candidate. Now he is repeatedly courting the religious nuts. So screw him if he's gonna choose the GWB path. Every President has to sort of kowtow to those people. It's just a matter of how you do it.Bush talks about God a lot - but as Ron has said repeatedly -when was the last time you saw him actually at Church? Whereas Bill Clinton never talked about God, but made sure nearly weekly he was photographed coming out of some sort of Church.I think that what you, me and a lot of other people fear is too much of the religious nut stuff working its way into policy, and I don't see a state gay marriage ban as being specifically a religious thing insofar as that there are a lot of non-religious people who also support it. We don't really know what McCain would be like as President as far as that goes. I see what he's been doing so far as the bare minimum he can get away with to turn some of the wacko vote around in his favor while maintaining his credibility. But in his other actions on the hill, he's never been one to shy away from confrontation with the other Republicans. Like on torture when he rasied a stink for a couple weeks and then folded and gave Bush everything he wanted anyway?There's much more going on with him than just this story, I'm sure people who agree more with his political views will have different opinions about all this but I at least had faith that he was his own man. He's backing off that and I'm left with few, if any, reasons to support him.  That's not even remotely true. The McCain version of that bill was adopted by Bush who then adapted a signing statement giving his interpretation of the provisions. It wasn't like it was something McCain had control over. It was more like Bush agreeing with McCain and then hedging his bets. My friend who's a democrat went to the Senate Armed Service Committee hearing on Abu Ghraib and said that McCain's questioning of Rumsfeld was the most riveting part of the hearing. McCain was legitimately fucking pissed about the whole thing to the point where he was nearly screaming at Rumsfeld.

Yerdaddy

11-03-2006, 12:14 AM

narc wrote:  HBox wrote:  narc wrote: If you're going to oppose gay marriage, this is the way to do it. At least he isn't backing a national amendment to the big constitution, which would be stupid. Other than that, how is this different than just pure politics? Bill Clinton doesn't fucking support gay marriage either. You're acting pissed because he's not acting like a liberal dem. McCain has always been an independent Republican. And he basically still is. There's no way I'm not voting for him in the next election.(I wrote him in in 2000).   The only reason I was ever interested in him as a candidate is because he eschewed all that "pure politics" stuff. This proposal goes farther then just stopping gays from being married and he knows it. It's just his latest attempt to try and win over the religious right. My politics never lined up with his but I always respected him for not bowing to the religious nuts. I would have considered voting for him if there was another lousy Democrat candidate. Now he is repeatedly courting the religious nuts. So screw him if he's gonna choose the GWB path.    Every President has to sort of kowtow to those people. It's just a matter of how you do it.Bush talks about God a lot - but as Ron has said repeatedly -when was the last time you saw him actually at Church? Whereas Bill Clinton never talked about God, but made sure nearly weekly he was photographed coming out of some sort of Church.I think that what you, me and a lot of other people fear is too much of the religious nut stuff working its way into policy, and I don't see a state gay marriage ban as being specifically a religious thing insofar as that there are a lot of non-religious people who also support it. We don't really know what McCain would be like as President as far as that goes. I see what he's been doing so far as the bare minimum he can get away with to turn some of the wacko vote around in his favor while maintaining his credibility. But in his other actions on the hill, he's never been one to shy away from confrontation with the other Republicans. You're right that this is politics. It's what he feels he has to do to win the presidency and he's probably right. But I'm not pissed that he's playing politics with this, I'm pissed because I think there are serious issues of values at stake here and McCain is supporting the wrong side. Here's a quote from one of these commreicals:"Prop 107 does one thing; it protects marriage. One man and one woman. Marriage is the foundation of society. It is how we raise our children, build strong families and create strong communities."First of all it does much more than one thing, so that's a lie. Second, it protects nothing. If Reeshy and Hottub got married, how the fuck would that effect the marriage of any other American couples? Ulness they decide to obsess about their own horror that gay people can have something that they were prohibited from having in the past, it effects their marriage in no way at all. On the other hand, this issue begs the question: Do we, as Americans have the right to choose who we marry? Or should we really be a country where we are restricted to marrying only within the groups that religious conservatives choose for us? You can't marry a child for a reason - children are assumed not to be capable of being responsible for making legally binding decisions. Fair enough. But gays who would marry are consenting adults. Yet they are prevented from choosing who they marry because of the religious views of others. That goes to the core principles of the Bill of Rights - the point of America in the first place. Substi

Yerdaddy

11-03-2006, 12:25 AM

narc wrote:  HBox wrote:  narc wrote:  HBox wrote:  narc wrote: If you're going to oppose gay marriage, this is the way to do it. At least he isn't backing a national amendment to the big constitution, which would be stupid. Other than that, how is this different than just pure politics? Bill Clinton doesn't fucking support gay marriage either. You're acting pissed because he's not acting like a liberal dem. McCain has always been an independent Republican. And he basically still is. There's no way I'm not voting for him in the next election.(I wrote him in in 2000).   The only reason I was ever interested in him as a candidate is because he eschewed all that "pure politics" stuff. This proposal goes farther then just stopping gays from being married and he knows it. It's just his latest attempt to try and win over the religious right. My politics never lined up with his but I always respected him for not bowing to the religious nuts. I would have considered voting for him if there was another lousy Democrat candidate. Now he is repeatedly courting the religious nuts. So screw him if he's gonna choose the GWB path.   Every President has to sort of kowtow to those people. It's just a matter of how you do it.Bush talks about God a lot - but as Ron has said repeatedly -when was the last time you saw him actually at Church? Whereas Bill Clinton never talked about God, but made sure nearly weekly he was photographed coming out of some sort of Church.I think that what you, me and a lot of other people fear is too much of the religious nut stuff working its way into policy, and I don't see a state gay marriage ban as being specifically a religious thing insofar as that there are a lot of non-religious people who also support it. We don't really know what McCain would be like as President as far as that goes. I see what he's been doing so far as the bare minimum he can get away with to turn some of the wacko vote around in his favor while maintaining his credibility. But in his other actions on the hill, he's never been one to shy away from confrontation with the other Republicans.   Like on torture when he rasied a stink for a couple weeks and then folded and gave Bush everything he wanted anyway?There's much more going on with him than just this story, I'm sure people who agree more with his political views will have different opinions about all this but I at least had faith that he was his own man. He's backing off that and I'm left with few, if any, reasons to support him.  That's not even remotely true. The McCain version of that bill was adopted by Bush who then adapted a signing statement giving his interpretation of the provisions. It wasn't like it was something McCain had control over. It was more like Bush agreeing with McCain and then hedging his bets. My friend who's a democrat went to the Senate Armed Service Committee hearing on Abu Ghraib and said that McCain's questioning of Rumsfeld was the most riveting part of the hearing. McCain was legitimately fucking pissed about the whole thing to the point where he was nearly screaming at Rumsfeld. You're both half right. It was a compromise legislation that left some of McCain's (and Warner's and Hegel's) wording, but left the language deliberately vague so that the administration and military and CIA personnel cannot be held responsible when they actual

A.J.

11-03-2006, 09:10 AM

Yerdaddy wrote: And McCain, Warner and Hegel have been furious with Rumsfeld since about 2002. From the beginning of his tenure he's been blowing off constitutionally required congressional testimony, and when he does, he talks to senators like he talks to the press. And they fucking hate him. Problem is, they only publicly call for his head AFTER elections. So Bush can ignore them. They're mavericks! ...sort of.And I've been to those hearings too. They're fucking hysterical. If anyone is in the DC area when Rumsfeld testifies to either the Senate Armed Services or Foreign Relations committees, don't miss it!You can catch them on C-SPAN.  I used to go to those in the past.  They're fucking awful.  It's all spin and posturing from those on the committee to the person(s) giving the testimony.  I think Yerdaddy mentioned in a separate post that all these guys do is talk about "what have you done for my state/district?"  It's absolutely true.  The real work is done by 20-something staffers.

Tenbatsuzen

11-03-2006, 09:16 AM

McCain and Rudy are still two of the most viable candidates.  I haven't seen ANYTHING from the republicans that makes me think otherwise.

ADF

11-03-2006, 04:15 PM

I think enough moderate republicans are sick of the way things have been going to vote for a Republican with a different stance.  If only someone like McCain would've stuck to his guns there might've been some light at the end of the proverbial tunnel for the right, but no.  It's all suckity suck suck suckin' the dick of idiotic conservative Christians who get weirded out by the homos.

Gvac

11-03-2006, 04:33 PM

Is anyone genuinely surprised that McCain has decided to bolster up his support with 2008 rapidly approaching?  And are you truly shocked that he's just another "finger in the wind" politician looking for ways to play both sides of the fence?  You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows.

TheMojoPin

11-03-2006, 06:12 PM

Gvac wrote: Is anyone genuinely surprised that McCain has decided to bolster up his support with 2008 rapidly approaching?  And are you truly shocked that he's just another "finger in the wind" politician looking for ways to play both sides of the fence?  You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows. The difference here is that he very clearly went out of his way to seperate himself from and even criticize the extreme neo-cons he's now cozying up to.  Sure, it's business as usual for most, but he showed he could have been different for at least a little while.I don't think anyone is actually "shocked" as opposed to just let down.

This message was edited by TheMojoPin on 11-3-06 @ 10:12 PM

Bulldogcakes

01-14-2007, 06:32 AM

<a href="http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=53743">Christian Leader Dobson Says He Won’t Support McCain 'Under Any Circumstances'...</a>See H? He cant be all bad . . . . .

nwm

01-14-2007, 06:46 AM

I hope Hillary gets the nomination so she can run on the plat form of violent video games is the reason the world is like it is.  She is an ass

Yerdaddy

01-14-2007, 10:37 AM

nwm wrote: I hope Hillary gets the nomination so she can run on the plat form of violent video games is the reason the world is like it is.  She is an ass Is that her political platform? I had no idea. Thanks for that.

ShowerBench

01-14-2007, 10:47 AM

McCain is a phony and a panderer.Idiot Son smeared him in the '00 primary (black baby, wife a drug addict) and McCain came back and carried water for the Idiot on '04.  Seems like whatever courage he had back in Vietnam is history.<img src="<a href="http://www.samefacts.com/archives/mccain_bush-hug-711518.jpg">http://www.samefacts.com/archives/mccain_bush-hug-711518.jpg</a>">

This message was edited by ShowerBench on 1-14-07 @ 2:54 PM

Chigworthy

01-14-2007, 12:26 PM

Plus the prick tried to ban Mixed Martial Arts competitions.

NewYorkDragons80

01-14-2007, 02:39 PM

TheMojoPin wrote: Gvac wrote: Is anyone genuinely surprised that McCain has decided to bolster up his support with 2008 rapidly approaching? And are you truly shocked that he's just another "finger in the wind" politician looking for ways to play both sides of the fence? You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows. The difference here is that he very clearly went out of his way to seperate himself from and even criticize the extreme neo-cons he's now cozying up to. Sure, it's business as usual for most, but he showed he could have been different for at least a little while.I don't think anyone is actually "shocked" as opposed to just let down. This message was edited by TheMojoPin on 11-3-06 @ 10:12 PM I don't think this really changes his beliefs or where he stands.  IMO, this is Jerry Falwell caving more than it is John McCain caving. Sure he called Falwell and "agent of intolerance," but Falwell recognizes the importance of having a viable and moderate pro-life conservative, which is something McCain has always been.  I am steadfast that after the last 4 years, Jerry Falwell needs John McCain rather than the other way around.

Recyclerz

01-14-2007, 06:18 PM

Chuck Hagel is the new McCain.

Yerdaddy

01-14-2007, 09:59 PM

And John Warner is McCain Classic?

Recyclerz

01-15-2007, 01:28 PM

Yerdaddy wrote: And John Warner is McCain Classic? Nah.  Warner never positioned himself as a "maverick", unless you count the time he married Elizabeth Taylor when she was way past her "fuck by" expiration date, just to pick up the Bennington Trophy.I think Warner (like Lugar) is just a throwback from  the time when all Republicans weren't batshit insane.

Yerdaddy

01-15-2007, 07:32 PM

Was going for the Coke joke. You know how hard it is to come up with a maverick republican other than McCain?

NewYorkDragons80

01-15-2007, 10:07 PM

At the end of the day, the Liberty visit doesn't change a damn thing.  You know he's the only person with the political support, will, and international respect to bring a victory in Iraq.  This was desperation on Jerry's part, and it didn't hurt McCain's standing with the base.

A.J.

01-16-2007, 02:36 AM

Yerdaddy wrote: Was going for the Coke joke. You know how hard it is to come up with a maverick republican other than McCain? <img src="http://www.nndb.com/people/271/000032175/jeffords-crop.jpg" border="0" width="240" height="318" />

Yerdaddy

01-16-2007, 03:22 AM

Doesn't count. He rode off the ranch.

A.J.

01-16-2007, 03:23 AM

You don't get any more Maverick than that.

Bulldogcakes

01-16-2007, 05:01 PM

Yerdaddy wrote: Doesn't count. He rode off the ranch.Here's two off the top of my head<img src="http://www.bluegrassreport.org/photos/uncategorized/chuck_hagel_headshot.jpg" border="0" width="200" height="279" /> And by FAR, the biggest maverick intellectually and on poilcy is . . . . . . <img src="http://www.usd.edu/urelations/images/NewtGingrich.jpg" border="0" width="200" height="279" />I rememeber when most Republicans thought he was a kook for most of what he believes. Now the many of same people embrace his ideas as core Republican values. Fucking sheep.

shamus mcfitzy

01-17-2007, 07:18 AM

NewYorkDragons80 wrote: At the end of the day, the Liberty visit doesn't change a damn thing.  You know he's the only person with the political support, will, and international respect to bring a victory in Iraq.  This was desperation on Jerry's part, and it didn't hurt McCain's standing with the base. I don't know how this isn't at least halvsies on the caving. McCain is speaking at a fundementalist college and being chummy with Falwell and presumably he was invited there. I might've been naive, but this isn't the McCain i imagined in my head. I was hoping that the crazy religious nut thing was just gonna be short-lived and that he would've given them the finger. I think he definitely could've beaten a Democrat because he would've stole plenty of votes from the middle-left. Hell I would've voted for him if he was running against Hilary and he'll still get the Republicans who are afraid of the Clinton menace.And I also think that he might be the only person who could lead us to victory in iraq, however, I think that that's a real small chance. It would've been anyway, and now its gonna be near impossible. But I do respect him enough to think that he theoretically could get us out with a "victory"

This message was edited by shamus mcfitzy on 1-17-07 @ 11:20 AM

Minge

04-01-2007, 08:52 AM

For all the images mentioned below, please visit http://cliveholloway.net/mccain/index.htm

hippygeek, a member of the Nine Inch Nails / Tool Message Board and Fansite http://www.echoingthesound.com recently pranked John McCain's MySpace comments page.

FUCK, FUCK, FUCK, FUCK, FUCK!

OK, there, I got that out of my system. I tried to think up a better title, but that's all I'm thinking right now.

Obviously some people don't share my sense of humor. This afternoon I was happily geeking away when I heard a knock at the door. I went to answer and was presented with a local sheriff and two FBI agents holding a lovely search warrant (scans coming when I can get down to Kinko's in the morning). Apparently, WITHOUT BOTHERING TO ASK A FUCKING PROGRAMMER WHETHER IT'S POSSIBLE OR NOT, I'm being accused of unlawful entry to the Senator's official web site!!! Anyone with HALF A FUCKING BRAIN will know that I did NO SUCH THING.

This is what the warrant allowed them to take:

Documents (handwritten or typed), printouts, video tapes, audio tapes, electronic data processing and storage devices, computers and computer systems including central processing units; internal and peripheral storage devices such as fixed disks, external hard disks, floppy disk drives and diskettes, tape drives and tapes, optical storage devices or other memory storage devices; peripheral input/output devices such as keyboards, printers, video display monitors, optical readers, and related communications devices such as modems; together with system documentation, operating logs and documentation, software and instruction manuals, computer disks, computers, computer storage devices, passwords or other items which are or contain evidence of violation of the above-described violations including the following:
(1) items which contain or refer to the Internet address "http://myspace.com/JohnMcCain"
(2) items which contain or refer to protest movements or anti-government activities or organizations...

It goes on for about another half a page, but you get the idea...

Basically, I'm fucked. As a programmer, my whole fucking life revolves around computers, so they've basically taken my life away. Sure I'll get it back eventually, but it's still going to be hell trying to work Monday - and exactly how I'll explain the loss of two VOIP phones to my boss I have no idea. Anyone got a cheap laptop? Oh, and get this - they even took my Year Zero lithos!!!

Anyway, when the dust settled this evening, I managed to persuade a neighbor to let me use her PC to get this out to you all. I am OK (so don't worry), and I already have a very good lawyer. I'm really tired right now, but will update you all in the morning at some point.

Oh, and here's a picture another neighbor took on her cell phone this afternoon - a little embarrassing, yes, but the neighbors have actually been very supportive, bless 'em - once I explained what happened they realized immediately how STUPID the whole thing was.

http://cliveholloway.net/mccain/fbi.jpg

Hey kids, be careful out there when spreading the word - never assume THEY won't care!

love hippygeek (aka cLive ;-)

ps - if you want to help me out, all offers would be most welcome!

The prank is as follows. (Posted a few days prior)

So, I'm reading Slashdot, and I see a funny article about pranking John McCain's Myspace page, and it got me thinking...

Hmmm, I think I want John to be my friend, so I add him to my friends.

Then I get all teary eyed at the thought of McCain becoming president, and go show my support:

http://cliveholloway.net/mccain/0.gif

Of course, I have to wait for my comment to get approved - God forbid any nutters comments get posted!

http://cliveholloway.net/mccain/1.gif

Oooo, the waiting... Then my comment appears:
http://cliveholloway.net/mccain/2.gif

Nice. Wait a moment. WHAT WAS I THINKING. McCain FOR PRESIDENT!!! Arghhh, think of the children! A sudden change of mind.

But, all is not lost! Let's look at when comments are approved. By the looks of it, around 6.30pm is the cut off time - I guess those staffers have to go home at some point!. OK, so I'll wait until 8pm, just to be on the safe side.

At 8pm, I replace my nice picture of John and my 1x1 marker gif with more, err, provocative images. Oh look, my comment has updated. How nice.

http://cliveholloway.net/mccain/3.jpg

I wonder how long it will last? Hopefully until morning :)

Updates will get posted here.
9.50pm

Someone just pointed out that the images have also had an effect on John's friends:
http://cliveholloway.net/mccain/4.jpg

Added bonus :)
9.00am

OMG - not only is it still there, but they've approved a rather apt comment too. They're even more clueless than I thought! :)

http://cliveholloway.net/mccain/5.jpg

Ooo, TNH front page. Lovely. Thanks Mike:

http://cliveholloway.net/mccain/6.jpg
9.36am

12 hours and counting. Just how hard is it to hit the "delete comment" button. These guys must be masochists... Other sites are picking up on it now too.
10.50am

OK, this is getting a little sad now. If this is still up tonight at 9.30pm, I'll take my images down (sooner if I get slashdotted or something). Looks like they approved one comment, then panicked. Hey guys, if you're reading this, click on "comments" under that lovely profile pic of John, scroll down to my comment and click the "Delete My Comment" link. It's not rocket science, you know... and then maybe look at disabling HTML in comments. Bet you're glad you learnt more about the web now rather than next year. Tch.
3.25pm

FINALLY, the comment gets removed. No doubt some consultant somewhere is getting a big fat check for teaching the McCain camp to RTFM. I can't complain. Almost 18 hours sat on their comments page, some great feedback from people and - huge props to the McCain supporters - not a single nutjob messaging me to say that I'm the scum of the earth blah, blah, blah. Oh well, I guess for a follow up, those of you that think I was a little mean should go and donate 5c to the man to make him feel better :)

The prank had to do with Nine Inch Nails' new Year Zero site http://www.artisresistance.com/

Midkiff

04-01-2007, 09:40 AM

big brother is watching, I guess

lleeder

04-01-2007, 09:56 AM

I just took the time to read all of that. Great stuff. sucks he got everything taken from him. They probably did it just to fuck with his life since he made McCain look like a tool.

furie

04-01-2007, 09:58 AM

SO, HE EDITED A COMMENT AFTER IT HAD BEEN APPROVED, THAT'S WHAT I'M GETTING out of this. not really hacking, but i guess that's his point...

lleeder

04-01-2007, 10:03 AM

I think he made a comment it got approved then he edited a comment and noone was there to double check his new comment so it stayed up. Then other people picked up on it and it became a subject of discussion on other political boards. Then the government came for him as punishment.

johnniewalker

04-01-2007, 10:11 AM

What the hell is a "Year Zero lithos", god i wish i was 1337.

cougarjake13

04-01-2007, 10:52 AM

thats funny as hell

too bad for him though

Tenbatsuzen

04-01-2007, 10:58 AM

Shrug. I don't like Hillary or a bunch of other dems, but I'm not fucking with them or their myspaces.

I'm all for "jokes", but what did you expect, dude?

cougarjake13

04-01-2007, 11:00 AM

i'm hoping guiliani makes it b/c i dont se any one else out there that i want to vote for

ralphbxny

04-01-2007, 11:07 AM

I dont like anyone who is running

BoxerAF

04-01-2007, 11:11 AM

big brother is watching, I guess

Big brother dosen't have to watch, we are all watching each other. Minge offended powerful people with fragile egos.

PapaBear

04-01-2007, 11:19 AM

Minge didn't do it. Some guy named Hippygeek did.

Though I think it's stupid to mess with people's myspace pages, I'm pissed off that they'd use valuable resources to harass someone who's not breaking the law. STUPID STUPID STUPID!!!

MrPink

04-01-2007, 11:31 AM

still believe this is the land of the free?

bobrobot

04-01-2007, 12:03 PM

Wow, our 1/2 wit government in action, harrassing & stealing from a prankster & trumping up charges sheerly for purposes of spite & revenge. Stupid fucking assholes, It's a public forum & all they needed 2 do was delete the comment. But they lost face so now they are tuff guys abusing power to create an atmosphere of fear (atmosfear?) in hopes of staving off an future "attacks" of such a "serious & threatening" nature. Maybe hippygeek will end up doing 2 years in a tiger cage, yeah, that'll teach him!!! When I get hacked there are no stormtroopers on the scene to rape & pillage the juvenile delinquents who have caused me any minor inconvenience &/or embarrassment!!!

Secret Service = Shutzstaffel!!!!!!!!!!

pennington

04-01-2007, 01:10 PM

Shrug. I don't like Hillary or a bunch of other dems, but I'm not fucking with them or their myspaces.

I'm all for "jokes", but what did you expect, dude?

Exactly.

Respect other people's property or suffer the consequences.

PapaBear

04-01-2007, 01:14 PM

Exactly.

Respect other people's property or suffer the consequences.
Like I said before, it's stupid to do what he did. But what do you mean by "consequences"? He didn't do anything illegal.

feralBoy

04-01-2007, 01:38 PM

Big brother dosen't have to watch, we are all watching each other. Minge offended powerful people with fragile egos.

"Under the spreading chestnut tree, I sold you and you sold me"

How the fuck did they get a warrant for that shit. What complete bullshit.

TastelessGinny

04-01-2007, 01:48 PM

He didn't "edit the post," he simply uploaded different pictures on his end and gave them the same name.

Let's say I have a picture of a kitty, called kitty.jpg. I upload it to my site that I own and have control over. I then go to Myspace, or even here, and post the HTML that will display the picture. (using the < img src=" tag, so it would be < img src="http://www.fakeaddress.com/kitty.jpg" > )

I decide that I want to change the picture that displays in the Myspace or message board post, but I don't want to (or can't) re-do the link. I simply go back to my site, delete kitty.jpg, then upload a picture of Tubgirl and call it kitty.jpg.

He didn't mess with McCain's Myspace; he simply uploaded a different picture and gave it the same name as the HTML link in the approved submission. McCain's folks can avoid this by not approving comments with the < img src= tag in them.

Tenbatsuzen

04-01-2007, 02:32 PM

Here's the deal... if you inconvenience a long-sitting and well-respected US Senator and potential President or VP candidate, he has and will inconvenience you just the same.

Think of it this way; what if CNN ran a story about how McCain couldn't control his own website? That makes him look weak in the flyover country's eyes.

He IS getting all his stuff back, and he DIDN'T get arrested, but they wanted to fuck with him because he thought he was being cool fucking with a senator.

It's essentially the 2007 version of leaving a flaming bag of dog crap on someone's step. He got caught.

Tenbatsuzen

04-01-2007, 02:35 PM

Wow, our 1/2 wit government in action, harrassing & stealing from a prankster & trumping up charges sheerly for purposes of spite & revenge. Stupid fucking assholes, It's a public forum & all they needed 2 do was delete the comment. But they lost face so now they are tuff guys abusing power to create an atmosphere of fear (atmosfear?) in hopes of staving off an future "attacks" of such a "serious & threatening" nature. Maybe hippygeek will end up doing 2 years in a tiger cage, yeah, that'll teach him!!! When I get hacked there are no stormtroopers on the scene to rape & pillage the juvenile delinquents who have caused me any minor inconvenience &/or embarrassment!!!

Secret Service = Shutzstaffel!!!!!!!!!!

Charges are only if you are arrested. They simply executed a warrant.

Tenbatsuzen

04-01-2007, 02:37 PM

BTW, Barack Obama did the same thing to a guy who was posting pedophile comments about his kids. Where is everyone to defend him? Is it different because he's a pedo? You want to ride the ACLU sword, ride it hard bitches, otherwise, shush.

pennington

04-01-2007, 02:47 PM

Like I said before, it's stupid to do what he did. But what do you mean by "consequences"? He didn't do anything illegal.

The consequences are having the FBI show up at your door with a search warrant.

Look, if he doesn't like McCain, he shouldn't vote for him.

Tenbatsuzen

04-01-2007, 02:55 PM

I love this part:

Basically, I'm fucked. As a programmer, my whole fucking life revolves around computers, so they've basically taken my life away. Sure I'll get it back eventually, but it's still going to be hell trying to work Monday - and exactly how I'll explain the loss of two VOIP phones to my boss I have no idea. Anyone got a cheap laptop? Oh, and get this - they even took my Year Zero lithos!!!

Well. You should have thought about that before you started your little prank.

It's kind of like the drunk driver who runs down a bunch a little kids and then sobers up and realizes what he's done.

SatCam

04-01-2007, 03:38 PM

I love this part:

Well. You should have thought about that before you started your little prank.

It's kind of like the drunk driver who runs down a bunch a little kids and then sobers up and realizes what he's done.

Uhh what? Who expects every piece of electronics in their house to be confiscated for making fun of mccain in his myspace?

Tenbatsuzen

04-01-2007, 04:17 PM

Uhh what? Who expects every piece of electronics in their house to be confiscated for making fun of mccain in his myspace?

What happened was, someone on McCain's support team thought they got hacked and was being alarmist. That's all. I doubt mcCain himself even looks at his page.

It's not part of the New World Order. Hell, when I put up the "Admin" graphic on my account on the old board, JustJon himself couldn't figure out how I did it at first before I explained it to him.

Pulling every piece of hardware is standard in hacking raids.

Again, it's like the flaming bag of dog poop.

And besides, that edgy deviant behavior of making torture jokes about John McCain. Wow! Classy! and Original!

Minge

04-01-2007, 08:26 PM

This was a clever April Fools prank done by a friend from a different message board. I really hope he dies. This is the first April Fools prank that I've ever been fooled into. Please kill me.

PapaBear

04-01-2007, 08:28 PM

Fuck. That's two that I fell for today.

Fat_Sunny

04-01-2007, 08:29 PM

Minge, Why Didn't You Go With "Minga". It Has A Pop To It.

Fat_Sunny

05-02-2007, 06:17 AM

Credit Drudge: "The first signs of the McCain re-surge?

SIMI VALLEY, Calif., -- ARG has new numbers today from the early state troika, Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina, showing McCain ahead in all three.

He' s up by 7 percent over Rudy in Iowa, 5 percent over Romney in New Hampshire and 13percent over Rudy in South Carolina.

Per pollster Dick Bennett, McCain has gained strength among independents and continues to do well among Republicans.

Fat Has Always Been Conflicted About McCain. He Generally Agrees With His Policies, Especially Trying To Get Money Out Of Politics, But He Just Seems Kind Of Odd. But Fat Also Learned Yesterday That The McCains Have 24 Pets, And Anyone Who Takes In That Many Animals Has To Have A Good Heart, So Fat Is Warming Up To McCain!

TheMojoPin

05-02-2007, 06:54 AM

But Fat Also Learned Yesterday That The McCains Have 24 Pets, And Anyone Who Takes In That Many Animals Has To Have A Good Heart, So Fat Is Warming Up To McCain!

That makes it sound like we'd be voting a crazy cat lady into office.

http://www.dcist.com/attachments/dcist_michael/simpsons_CrazyCatLady.jpg

Jujubees2

05-02-2007, 07:19 AM

I kind of liked him until he rolled over as Bush was attacking him in the 2000 primaries, questioning his patriotism and accusing him of fathering illegitimate children, and his wife of being a drug addict.

I mean here's a man who hid in the National Guard questioning the patriotism of a guy who was a POW in Nam. Why McCain didn't come out with and stand up for himself really baffled me.

sailor

05-02-2007, 07:35 AM

I kind of liked him until he rolled over as Bush was attacking him in the 2000 primaries, questioning his patriotism and accusing him of fathering illegitimate children, and his wife of being a drug addict.

I mean here's a man who hid in the National Guard questioning the patriotism of a guy who was a POW in Nam. Why McCain didn't come out with and stand up for himself really baffled me.

i've been a mccain supporter since day 1. i think he basically was trying to take the high-ground against bush. it's sad that that doesn't work in america too much.

Jujubees2

05-02-2007, 07:38 AM

i've been a mccain supporter since day 1. i think he basically was trying to take the high-ground against bush. it's sad that that doesn't work in america too much.

I'm not saying he should have come out and called Bush a retard but he should have defended himself a lot better.

TheMojoPin

05-02-2007, 08:02 AM

I'm not saying he should have come out and called Bush a retard but he should have defended himself a lot better.

I'm more let down with how he's now kissing the ass of the religious right he was so vocal against in 2000. It's not like I want him to attack them...I just liked how he so clearly saw that their influence in government was getting a bit worrisome and needed to be scaled back.

sailor

05-02-2007, 08:06 AM

I'm more let down with how he's now kissing the ass of the religious right he was so vocal against in 2000. It's not like I want him to attack them...I just liked how he so clearly saw that their influence in government was getting a bit worrisome and needed to be scaled back.

something aboot politics and bed-fellows. you need to do what you can to get elected. everyone does it with one group or another.

TheMojoPin

05-02-2007, 08:09 AM

something aboot politics and bed-fellows. you need to do what you can to get elected. everyone does it with one group or another.

Very ture, but this was just such a blatant about-face that it really turned me off to him. I really don't know where my vote will end up at this point.

sailor

05-02-2007, 08:21 AM

Very ture, but this was just such a blatant about-face that it really turned me off to him. I really don't know where my vote will end up at this point.

the thing is a very large force behind his losing to bush was the religious right. those are important fences for him to mend.

HBox

05-02-2007, 08:29 AM

Regardless of his pandering to the religous right I can't support him because of his stance on the war. Is there any point under which he'd stop this?

furie

05-02-2007, 08:52 AM

I was a McCain guy in 2000. But now, 7 years later, i'm not so sure he could be elected, or should be elected.
I guess i've lost confidance in him. Still not ruling him out.

TheMojoPin

05-02-2007, 10:52 AM

the thing is a very large force behind his losing to bush was the religious right. those are important fences for him to mend.

Yeah, but they're not essential to win. The Republicans only embraced them as a major part of their political machine within the last 20-25 years. All it takes is for the frontrunner Republican candidate to say "no thanks" and they're pushed backed to the margins where they belong. I don't know McCain is that frontrunner, but he folded pretty damn fast.

badmonkey

05-02-2007, 05:24 PM

Yeah, but they're not essential to win. The Republicans only embraced them as a major part of their political machine within the last 20-25 years. All it takes is for the frontrunner Republican candidate to say "no thanks" and they're pushed backed to the margins where they belong. I don't know McCain is that frontrunner, but he folded pretty damn fast.

Actually, if the Republican candidate tells the religious right to go screw, they are likely to go screw the Republican by voting for the Democratic candidate. Similar to the reason the Democrats refuse to pursue tough gun laws in the wake of VA Tech. They are afraid to piss off the NRA.

You don't have to do what they want all the time, but you definately never tell any large group of people "no thanks" when running for office.

Badmonkey

sailor

05-02-2007, 05:37 PM

Yeah, but they're not essential to win. The Republicans only embraced them as a major part of their political machine within the last 20-25 years. All it takes is for the frontrunner Republican candidate to say "no thanks" and they're pushed backed to the margins where they belong. I don't know McCain is that frontrunner, but he folded pretty damn fast.

you'd have to be more than a front-runner. mccain was virtually neck-and-neck with bush going into south carolina. then he attacked the religious right and got smacked down. i don't think there's a need to pander (and here he might be trying to hard to win them over) but the actual attack was electoral suicide.

and i'd say they became a force in the 60s. it's not that the republicans decided "hey, let's appease these groups" but rather that that's when they began to mobilize. that's not going to go away anytime soon.

edit: btw, religious right is apparently seen as a pejorative. who knew?

Yerdaddy

05-02-2007, 06:23 PM

Actually, if the Republican candidate tells the religious right to go screw, they are likely to go screw the Republican by voting for the Democratic candidate. Similar to the reason the Democrats refuse to pursue tough gun laws in the wake of VA Tech. They are afraid to piss off the NRA.

You don't have to do what they want all the time, but you definately never tell any large group of people "no thanks" when running for office.

Badmonkey

Zippy chance the religious right votes democrat. Even moderate secular republicans on this board aren't switching to the Dems yet. We're eeeeeeeviiiiiiiiiiil! They'll stay home.

high fly

05-02-2007, 06:26 PM

Drudge?
This is from Drudge?
The same Drudge who told us about 15 or 16 months ago that Ariel Sharon was dead?

Only a fool goes to Drudge for news.

high fly

05-02-2007, 06:30 PM

I was a McCain guy in 2000. But now, 7 years later, i'm not so sure he could be elected, or should be elected.
I guess i've lost confidance in him. Still not ruling him out.

I used to like and admire McCain too.
Over the last 7 years he has sold his soul sucking up to Bush in a way he should be ashamed of.
That he is not leads me to question the character I once thought he had.

McCain will not be the nominee.
There is too much McCain hate in the GOP.

Yerdaddy

05-02-2007, 06:44 PM

Let me put out a message to Republicans because I know how much you count on my advice: Please nominate McCain over Giuliani. Please. I finally looked up what the republican candidates' positions were on Iraq and Giuliani's position is... BUSH'S POSITION! Please please please do not spend two years telling me how you've rejected Bush over his handling of the war and then turn around and elect his exact clone! I'm depressed enough as it is without that happening.

And when I say exact clone I mean his position has not been just to support the damn war, but to talk about the war in cheap aggressive slogans that demonstrate he knows as little about what's going on as Bush does.

And Democrats, don't put too much weight on McCain's support for the war and the surge and what-not. McCain's criticizm of the war, while not as strong as I'd have liked it to be, has been an important factor in getting what little changes we've gotten from the Bush administration and has been very politically risky for him to do. I'm not sure if he would have invaded Iraq, but he certainly wouldn't have fucked it up like Bush did.

As for the surge, it's really a minor issue: the question of throwing a Hail Mary pass with 3 seconds on the clock or just taking a knee. Don't judge a guy on the basis of that single call. As far as the current Iraq strategy goes, McCain is closer to my opinions than any other candidate, including Biden or my own choice, Hillary.

BUT SERIOUSLY - NO GIULIANI!!!!!!!R!!!!!!!E!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!E! !!!!!!!!!!!S!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!H!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Y's a mo!

PhilDeez

05-02-2007, 06:55 PM

On a side note, remember McCain was one of the only people to step up and say he would continue to be a guest on the Imus show after the Rutgers incident. He spoke of forgivness and redemption, and I actually found it refreshing.
Aside from his age, I think he makes a very viable moderate candidate regardless of what side of the isle you sit.

epo

05-02-2007, 07:07 PM

I remember when McCain was "Straight Talking John". Of course now he goes to Bob Jones University on his weekends and fondles Jerry Falwell's balls on his weeknights.

Why "real republicans" don't have stiffies over Chuck Hagel is beyond me.

epo

05-02-2007, 07:08 PM

On a side note, remember McCain was one of the only people to step up and say he would continue to be a guest on the Imus show after the Rutgers incident. He spoke of forgivness and redemption, and I actually found it refreshing.
Aside from his age, I think he makes a very viable moderate candidate regardless of what side of the isle you sit.

Does running for a third Bush term make you a moderate? Or a sell-out?

Yerdaddy

05-02-2007, 07:08 PM

On a side note, remember McCain was one of the only people to step up and say he would continue to be a guest on the Imus show after the Rutgers incident. He spoke of forgivness and redemption, and I actually found it refreshing.
Aside from his age, I think he makes a very viable moderate candidate regardless of what side of the isle you sit.

The groom's side, please.

OH! Sorry. Thought you were an usher for a second.

high fly

05-02-2007, 10:35 PM

On a side note, remember McCain was one of the only people to step up and say he would continue to be a guest on the Imus show after the Rutgers incident. He spoke of forgivness and redemption, and I actually found it refreshing.
Aside from his age, I think he makes a very viable moderate candidate regardless of what side of the isle you sit.

I generally take the leeward side.

high fly

05-02-2007, 10:37 PM

I remember when McCain was "Straight Talking John". Of course now he goes to Bob Jones University on his weekends and fondles Jerry Falwell's balls on his weeknights.

I can't wait for him to announce that Ted Sampley will be a major figure working on his campaign down south....

patsopinion

05-02-2007, 11:22 PM

Credit Drudge: "The first signs of the McCain re-surge?

SIMI VALLEY, Calif., -- ARG has new numbers today from the early state troika, Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina, showing McCain ahead in all three.

He' s up by 7 percent over Rudy in Iowa, 5 percent over Romney in New Hampshire and 13percent over Rudy in South Carolina.

Per pollster Dick Bennett, McCain has gained strength among independents and continues to do well among Republicans.

Fat Has Always Been Conflicted About McCain. He Generally Agrees With His Policies, Especially Trying To Get Money Out Of Politics, But He Just Seems Kind Of Odd. But Fat Also Learned Yesterday That The McCains Have 24 Pets, And Anyone Who Takes In That Many Animals Has To Have A Good Heart, So Fat Is Warming Up To McCain!

the real problem with these polls is that they dont account for dems
he could pull a lot of votes for him if a very weak canidate was put up by the blues
(pretty mutch all of them as far as i can tell)

obama will not be president
hillary will not be president
it doesnt look like edwards is a viable option
so it breaks down to the guy from arizona(which could be a real otion)(this is going to be a very intresting election to watch due to the people's want to vote for a dem and the lack of a real leader among them)
(i got 50 on McCain though

CofyCrakCocaine

05-03-2007, 05:38 AM

Yeah I was excited for McCain back in 2000. The fact that he provides a bunch of lip-service to the religious right and the war in Iraq don't really disturb me all that much. He wants votes. He's been a staunch critic of the way the war has been run, which is good enough in my book since the way this war has been run is the worst most god-awful part of the whole war itself; and I doubt his views and personal opposition to the religious morons in the country has altered much in the past seven years.
I doubt any Democrats are honestly doing more than giving lip-service to liberals who want to get out of Iraq. They're just as phony as any other politician. Especially that goddamn automaton, Hilary.

The Republicans have my vote for now because of Obama and Clinton jumping on the "Fire Imus" bandwagon.

K.C.

05-03-2007, 01:48 PM

I'm a bit surprised that McCain's up over Romney in New Hampshire, but the rest sound about right.

I've never believed Rudy was going to hold up to the scrutiny of the primary.

If I was a Republican, I don't know that I'd necessarily want to put it all on McCain to bring it home in '08...a lot has changed in eight years...I think he's much less viable now than he was, and it's going to be very difficult for himself to distinguish himself from Bush.

K.C.

05-03-2007, 01:51 PM

The Republicans have my vote for now because of Obama and Clinton jumping on the "Fire Imus" bandwagon.

That's kind of silly...I doubt any of the candidates on either side are going to 'take up the Imus cause.'

They're all spineless and they'll all pander if they think it'll get them votes. The only reason you'll hear about Obama and Clinton is because Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton are going to end up supporting one of them.

McCain, Giuliani, etc...don't have to worry about getting asked about the Imus thing, because it's not a relevant question to their constituency...but if they WERE asked, they'd all condemn it.

Midkiff

05-03-2007, 02:19 PM

they all suck

epo

05-03-2007, 06:14 PM

they all suck Falwell's balls

Fixed it for ya!

Midkiff

05-03-2007, 07:02 PM

Fixed it for ya!

that too!

Yerdaddy

05-03-2007, 09:38 PM

Yeah I was excited for McCain back in 2000. The fact that he provides a bunch of lip-service to the religious right and the war in Iraq don't really disturb me all that much. He wants votes. He's been a staunch critic of the way the war has been run, which is good enough in my book since the way this war has been run is the worst most god-awful part of the whole war itself; and I doubt his views and personal opposition to the religious morons in the country has altered much in the past seven years.
I doubt any Democrats are honestly doing more than giving lip-service to liberals who want to get out of Iraq. They're just as phony as any other politician. Especially that goddamn automaton, Hilary.

The Republicans have my vote for now because of Obama and Clinton jumping on the "Fire Imus" bandwagon.

You would seriously cast your vote for the most powerful person in the universe based on Imus?

Fezticle98

07-12-2007, 08:00 PM

Was he trying to pick up a lady of the evening? No.

A gentleman of the evening? No.

He offered to suck an undercover cop's cock (say that 3 times fast) for $20.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,289137,00.html

Judge Smails

07-12-2007, 08:02 PM

It don't make you a bad person.

PapaBear

07-12-2007, 08:04 PM

It sucks to be him.

Recyclerz

07-12-2007, 08:13 PM

Looks like the Republicans blow another one!

Confession: I was hoping somebody posted about this so I could try out that line.

BeltOfScotch

07-12-2007, 08:14 PM

http://www.foxnews.com/images/299831/1_61_071207_allen_bob.jpg

This guy? Offering to pay to suck dick? Impossible.

Fezticle98

07-12-2007, 08:16 PM

This guy? Offering to pay to suck dick? Impossible.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure he didn't offer to pay.

Tenbatsuzen

07-12-2007, 08:16 PM

http://www.foxnews.com/images/299831/1_61_071207_allen_bob.jpg

This guy? Offering to pay to suck dick? Impossible.

Big A?

HBox

07-12-2007, 08:22 PM

http://www.foxnews.com/images/299831/1_61_071207_allen_bob.jpg

This guy? Offering to pay to suck dick? Impossible.

"It's cold out here."

scottinnj

07-12-2007, 09:01 PM

Damn you're good HBox! I wonder if he is driving a Subaru?

HAHA! I guess Fox News isn't as big a Republican Mouthpiece as some of you say it is. This story makes Republicans look bad (dammit!) and links the badness to McCain's campaign.

I thought McCain's campaign would be over by the end of the summer....now I believe he will quit at the end of the month, when his payroll runs out.

PapaBear

07-12-2007, 09:05 PM

I don't think Fox ever really like McCain that much anyway. Besides... no matter who it is, that story is just too good to pass up, when it comes to ratings.

scottinnj

07-12-2007, 09:13 PM

I don't think Fox ever really like McCain that much anyway. Besides... no matter who it is, that story is just too good to pass up, when it comes to ratings.

True, the Drunk Driving Story was pretty juicy too about Bush.

Yerdaddy

07-13-2007, 12:23 AM

John McCain's campaign in Florida, said at a news conference. "I am not resigning my office because the people elected me and want me to do a good job. I am going to do a good job for them in finishing this term."

...ZZZZZZZZZIP!

Allen called his arrest "an ugly and unpleasant situation that has been thrust on me"

Hey, that's extra, buddy!

The lawmaker had sponsored a failed bill that would have tightened the state's prohibition on public sex.

...called the "Donkey Punch Ammendment."

He choked up when he thanked backers who had contacted him to offer their support.

Alright! No way Fox was adding these double-entendres to the story by coincidence. Their fucking "news" room is more like a frat house than a serious news business.

And I don't think this will hurt McCain at all. The guy was one of six of his campaign co-chairs in the state and it'll be forgotten come primary time. And by then we might find out he got the shaft after all.

sailor

07-13-2007, 02:44 AM

Alright! No way Fox was adding these double-entendres to the story by coincidence. Their fucking "news" room is more like a frat house than a serious news business.

And I don't think this will hurt McCain at all. The guy was one of six of his campaign co-chairs in the state and it'll be forgotten come primary time. And by then we might find out he got the shaft after all.

that's a real stretch. the first two are direct quotes, not added. the last three (in the last two quoted sections) are the words that would be used even if the story wasn't aboot sex. and "tightened" and "backers" how are those double-entendres in a story aboot blowjobs? "choked up" that i can see, but it's still a phrase you'd use all the time to describe that person's emotional state.

heck, a quick spin on cnn for the story gives us (http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/07/12/mccain.campaign/index.html?iref=newssearch)"It was the second blow for Giuliani's campaign." (they tied this story into rudy's campaign and some legal problems his staff are having. and that's actually a triple-entendre as one of the guys was arrested on cocaine charges. oh, wait...i said staff! no, that was intentional.)

A.J.

07-13-2007, 03:58 AM

Veteran's Memorial Park was under surveillance when Allen was seen coming in and out of a restroom three times, said police Lt. Todd Hutchinson. Allen, 48, then approached an undercover officer and was arrested.

It's been done before.

http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2007/05_01/georgemichPA1805_468x405.jpg

Zorro

07-13-2007, 06:45 AM

We all know that cop was a slut

Fat_Sunny

07-13-2007, 06:57 AM

Hey, Anyone Offers F_S $20 They're On! And He's Not A Cop, Either!

high fly

07-16-2007, 08:36 PM

What I find to be fun about the story is he didn't even get the sex he was after, yet he still has to resign in disgrace.
That durned A.J. done locked up the thread I started about the larger issue here.
I mean, consider the cases of such GOP politicians who get ruined while involved in sex scandals IN WHICH THEY DIDN'T MANAGE TO SCORE! :

* Bob Allen

* Bob Packwood

* John Tower

* Mark Foley

* Tom Delay

* Randall Tobias

* Bob Ryan - That bloke who was married to the babe from Star Trek. Ryan takes the cake because he was married to her at the time!

Could it be that conservative inability to get laid has something to do with their [politics, especially when they see liberals consistently with too many women?

LiddyRules

07-16-2007, 08:57 PM

Maybe we should just accept that when you have a politician, and an entire staff of people in politics, there will be scandals in at least a few of their closets. So just like move on.

A.J.

07-17-2007, 03:31 AM

What I find to be fun about the story is he didn't even get the sex he was after, yet he still has to resign in disgrace.
That durned A.J. done locked up the thread I started about the larger issue here.
I mean, consider the cases of such GOP politicians who get ruined while involved in sex scandals IN WHICH THEY DIDN'T MANAGE TO SCORE! :

* Tom Delay

I ask again: what sex scandal was Delay allegedly involved in?

* Bob Ryan - That bloke who was married to the babe from Star Trek. Ryan takes the cake because he was married to her at the time!

That was JACK Ryan. I don't think Channel 4 weatherman Bob Ryan and/or Boston Globe sports columnist Bob Ryan would either have had a chance with Jeri Ryan!

cupcakelove

07-17-2007, 03:33 AM

This is such a non news story. McCain probably had no idea who this guy was until this.

high fly

07-17-2007, 10:18 AM

Oops.
Never mind.

high fly

07-17-2007, 10:20 AM

That was JACK Ryan. I don't think Channel 4 weatherman Bob Ryan and/or Boston Globe sports columnist Bob Ryan would either have had a chance with Jeri Ryan!

Yep.
Jack Ryan.

This is what he blew it with:

http://www.moveleft.com/moveleft/images/jeri_ryan_light_blue_sweater.jpg

Bulldogcakes

07-17-2007, 03:02 PM

I ask again: what sex scandal was Delay allegedly involved in?

That was JACK Ryan. I don't think Channel 4 weatherman Bob Ryan and/or Boston Globe sports columnist Bob Ryan would either have had a chance with Jeri Ryan!

NSFW (http://www.allscifi.com/aridor/pictures/7doctor2.jpg)

scottinnj

07-17-2007, 06:41 PM

NSFW (http://www.allscifi.com/aridor/pictures/7doctor2.jpg)

If my wife gets captured by the Borg, do I get to look forward to that?

To Quote Bush:

"Bring it on."

Tenbatsuzen

07-19-2007, 01:48 PM

What I find to be fun about the story is he didn't even get the sex he was after, yet he still has to resign in disgrace.
That durned A.J. done locked up the thread I started about the larger issue here.
I mean, consider the cases of such GOP politicians who get ruined while involved in sex scandals IN WHICH THEY DIDN'T MANAGE TO SCORE! :

* Bob Allen

* Bob Packwood

* John Tower

* Mark Foley

* Tom Delay

* Randall Tobias

* Bob Ryan - That bloke who was married to the babe from Star Trek. Ryan takes the cake because he was married to her at the time!

Could it be that conservative inability to get laid has something to do with their [politics, especially when they see liberals consistently with too many women?

The Jack Ryan thing wasn't even that much of a scandal. He took Jeri to sex clubs, she didn't dig it, and then decided to fuck with him when they divorced.

I mean, is it really a sex scandal when it;s with your own wife?

But we can thank Seven of Nine for the rise of Barack Obama. Chocolate rain, indeed.

buzzard

07-19-2007, 02:04 PM

The shots of McCain flying on Southwest air are playing real well here in AZ. I doubt he could get elected to anything anymore,Straight Talk Express...indeed!

FMJeff

01-20-2008, 08:07 PM

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/

I think what Chuck Norris fails to understand, as does Mike Huckabee apparently, is that he is Chuck Norris!

Who on earth cares about what Chuck Norris has to say? You're a washed-up 80's action movie star relegated to doing early morning weight machine infomercials and shilling for a republican candidate that will never win.

President Huckabee? Go ahead America. Elect a hardline christian conservative and see what happens. Haven't learned your lesson from the last one, huh?

Chuck Norris. Please. Having Chuck norris at his side pretty much guarantees his defeat. I consider it a good sign. Choose your friends wisely when campaigning, Mike. Walker, Texas Ranger not the best decision....

PapaBear

01-20-2008, 08:10 PM

He's only 4 years older than Norris.

SinA

01-20-2008, 08:12 PM

In Chuck's defense, McCain is one ooooooooold mutha.

FUNKMAN

01-20-2008, 08:13 PM

McCain should jump up and punch him in the dick...:smile:

the fucking media will report and print anything, they suck!

Soupy_Dreck

01-21-2008, 05:09 AM

In Chuck's defense, McCain is one ooooooooold mutha.

shut yo mouth!

DolaMight

01-21-2008, 06:10 AM

When I go hiking I break twigs and branches so Walker Texas Ranger can find me if I get lost.

To Norris and any other huckabees Mac is Back in 08 kung fu bitches.

ralphbxny

01-21-2008, 06:14 AM

Mccain Norris 08

BoondockSaint

01-21-2008, 06:48 AM

Norris can say anything he wants about McCain. They were both POWs in Vietnam but Chuck was the one who went back to get the rest of the men. Even Gen Trau couldn't stop him.

A.J.

01-21-2008, 07:14 AM

Norris can say anything he wants about McCain. They were both POWs in Vietnam but Chuck was the one who went back to get the rest of the men. Even Gen Trau couldn't stop him.

The greatness of this post needed to be acknowledged.

K.C.

01-21-2008, 08:37 AM

shut yo mouth!

Jus' talkin' bout McCain!

Soupy_Dreck

01-21-2008, 08:56 AM

shut yo mouth!

Jus' talkin' bout McCain!

i can dig it...

badmonkey

01-21-2008, 11:01 AM

Norris can say anything he wants about McCain. They were both POWs in Vietnam but Chuck was the one who went back to get the rest of the men. Even Gen Trau couldn't stop him.

He also single handedly won the War on Drugs. (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0099399/)

Was willing to send his own son to fight. (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0101702/)

I think Huckabee and every other candidate should offer to serve as Chuck's VP instead.

List of reasons Chuck Norris should be president. (http://www.chucknorrisfacts.com/)

thejives

01-21-2008, 11:06 AM

It doesn't matter what we think.
On election day, Chuck Norris will be so fast that he will simultaneously appear in all the voting booths, press a shiv into each of our kidneys and watch us vote for Huckabee before allowing us to continue living.

NortonRules

01-21-2008, 11:08 AM

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/

I think what Chuck Norris fails to understand, as does Mike Huckabee apparently, is that he is Chuck Norris!

Who on earth cares about what Chuck Norris has to say? You're a washed-up 80's action movie star relegated to doing early morning weight machine infomercials and shilling for a republican candidate that will never win.

President Huckabee? Go ahead America. Elect a hardline christian conservative and see what happens. Haven't learned your lesson from the last one, huh?

Chuck Norris. Please. Having Chuck norris at his side pretty much guarantees his defeat. I consider it a good sign. Choose your friends wisely when campaigning, Mike. Walker, Texas Ranger not the best decision....

You're pretty ignorant if you think Huckabee 'will never win'. He's got a chance. I don't want him to, but he has a chance. He's a religious nut. That's what this country loves.

angrymissy

01-21-2008, 11:17 AM

You're pretty ignorant if you think Huckabee 'will never win'. He's got a chance. I don't want him to, but he has a chance. He's a religious nut. That's what this country loves.

Ignorant? Seems like people love to throw around that word.

Based on the numbers, how high would you say his chances are of even getting the nomination? Sure, he'll gain some ground in the bible belt, I'm sure, but people want a change.

Delegates
Romney 66
McCain 38
Huckabee 26
Thompson 8
Paul 6
Giuliani 1
Hunter 1

flippin

01-21-2008, 11:21 AM

did any one hear anything on oanda. they had a meeting last friday that they didnt know about (speculate, speculate) and on their 92.3 website (oanda.com) steve from bayshore said they will see us monday, and today, monday, the show was a worst of. let me know if we know anything, a lil worried.

angrymissy

01-21-2008, 11:22 AM

did any one hear anything on oanda. they had a meeting last friday that they didnt know about (speculate, speculate) and on their 92.3 website (oanda.com) steve from bayshore said they will see us monday, and today, monday, the show was a worst of. let me know if we know anything, a lil worried.

Wrong thread much? (It's a federal holiday today, that's why they're off, I'm assuming)

SatCam

01-21-2008, 12:58 PM

did he also tell Mccain he had aids?

K.C.

01-21-2008, 01:14 PM

You're pretty ignorant if you think Huckabee 'will never win'. He's got a chance. I don't want him to, but he has a chance. He's a religious nut. That's what this country loves.

The thing that'll sink Huckabee, if he loses, isn't religion at all. It's his light-populism.

Corporate Republicans and corporate Democrats try to squash it whenever it pops up on both sides of the isle.

The people running the party want nothing to do with that message. It's similar with the Democrats and John Edwards. Edwards is much more of a populist, than Huckabee, though, and it's a lot of the reason why he's gotten none of the party establishment backing this time around.

In fact, for you Bloomberg guys out there, if you want to see him in the race with a legitimate chance to win, hope for an Edwards vs. Huckabee race...because both the corporate Dems and corporate Republicans will flock to him in large numbers.

FMJeff

01-21-2008, 01:35 PM

You're pretty ignorant if you think Huckabee 'will never win'. He's got a chance. I don't want him to, but he has a chance. He's a religious nut. That's what this country loves.

Guliani "has a chance". Ron Paul "has a chance". Neither will win. I don't care about many friends Ron Paul has on MySpace. Hell, I have a chance, and I'm neither old enough or qualified enough to run for president.

The electorate will not allow another christian conservative anti-abortion anti-gay republican candidate, not to mention a former baptist minister. Mark my words.

And this country doesn't love "religious nuts". They love moderate candidates with strong christian values. There's nothing nutty or crazy about President Bush, other than the fact that he's an idiot and a son of a former president. People sometimes enjoy a continuity of leadership within a family line. It's why the concept of nobility, kings, queens and chiefs survive to this day.

Mike Huckabee is a Norman Rockwell goody-two shoes. I see no strength in leadership in him. I despise his "aww shucks" attitude and his stupid sweaters. He's crafting an image of the everyman. I don't want an everyman.

If I was going to have anybody, it would be McCain, over two decades of solid experience in government and politics, accomplished athlete, soldier, survivor.

Next to that, it's a toss-up between Hillary and Obama. I really couldn't say. I don't feel either are particularly presidential material. Hillary is too tightly wound and Obama is just inexperienced.

I'm a democrat by the way.

keithy_19

01-21-2008, 04:31 PM

Huckabee is my least favorite candidate for the Republican nomination.

1)McCain
2)Thompson
3)Romney

I know Thompson doesn't have a shot in hell. I just really like the anti-big government stance he takes on most things. Let the states have their own say on social issues, ie: gay marriage, abortion.

scottinnj

01-21-2008, 05:53 PM

Guliani "has a chance". Ron Paul "has a chance". Neither will win. I don't care about many friends Ron Paul has on MySpace. Hell, I have a chance, and I'm neither old enough or qualified enough to run for president.

The electorate will not allow another christian conservative anti-abortion anti-gay republican candidate, not to mention a former baptist minister. Mark my words.

And this country doesn't love "religious nuts". They love moderate candidates with strong christian values. There's nothing nutty or crazy about President Bush, other than the fact that he's an idiot and a son of a former president. People sometimes enjoy a continuity of leadership within a family line. It's why the concept of nobility, kings, queens and chiefs survive to this day.

Mike Huckabee is a Norman Rockwell goody-two shoes. I see no strength in leadership in him. I despise his "aww shucks" attitude and his stupid sweaters. He's crafting an image of the everyman. I don't want an everyman.

If I was going to have anybody, it would be McCain, over two decades of solid experience in government and politics, accomplished athlete, soldier, survivor.

Next to that, it's a toss-up between Hillary and Obama. I really couldn't say. I don't feel either are particularly presidential material. Hillary is too tightly wound and Obama is just inexperienced.

I'm a democrat by the way.

QFT

I agree 100% with that post, and I'm a Republican.

K.C.

01-21-2008, 08:51 PM

If I was told a Republican HAD to win in '08, I'd want McCain to be the nominee. But that's more as a reaction to the fact that it's not a strong field.

But he will have a very difficult time winning. No matter who wins the Democratic nomination, they will tie McCain to Bush because of their similar war views from day one. And McCain can't even really use Immigration or Religion as a wedge issue, because he doesn't line up with his party on those.

epo

01-21-2008, 08:55 PM

If I was told a Republican HAD to win in '08, I'd want McCain to be the nominee. But that's more as a reaction to the fact that it's not a strong field.

But he will have a very difficult time winning. No matter who wins the Democratic nomination, they will tie McCain to Bush because of their similar war views from day one. And McCain can't even really use Immigration or Religion as a wedge issue, because he doesn't line up with his party on those.

No matter the candidate, I'll give you the formula for this fall:

Republican Candidate = Bush
Democratic Candidate <> Bush

Exhibit A:

http://www.truthdig.com/images/eartothegrounduploads/mccain_bush_hug_300.jpg

Result = Dems win.

K.C.

01-21-2008, 09:09 PM

No matter the candidate, I'll give you the formula for this fall:

Republican Candidate = Bush
Democratic Candidate <> Bush

Exhibit A:

http://www.truthdig.com/images/eartothegrounduploads/mccain_bush_hug_300.jpg

Result = Dems win.

The other thing I would be very curious to follow if McCain wins the nomination is whether or not the establishment in the Republican party gets behind him.

He's not their candidate. In fact, Fred Thompson was the only guy who kind of embodied what the Bush-ite neocons who've been in power the last eight years were all about.

So a McCain nomination puts them in an interesting dilemma...if he wins, him, and his political philosophies becomes the new face of the Republican Party.

The Christian conservatives don't want that.

The ultra-Capitalist economic conservatives (The Hannity and Limbaugh types) don't want that.

The neo-cons don't want that, because of McCain's foreign policy views.

So there's a lot of factions of the party that stand to lose, in terms of having their issues pushed and voices heard, in a McCain presidency.

Of course, the flip side of that dilemma is that if they abandon him, they risk the return of Clintons to the White House.

So it'll be interesting to watch exactly how much some of these factions get behind him if he wins the nomination. Somewhere in all their minds, they'd have to be considering that if he lost, they could come back in 4 years with someone who more accurately reflects their visions of the Republican Party.

Of course, the scariest part of that is that if you allow the other side to take power, you may not get it back.

I could see him getting the Gore in 2000 treatment from his party, where McCain basically gets very lukewarm endorsements from all the factions of the party, but the ones I mentioned don't really work as hard for him as they would if this were Bush Term Three on the line.

FMJeff

01-21-2008, 09:49 PM

I think we should stop thinking about which candidate best reflects our respective party's values and really focus on who is the most qualified. If this was a corporate position, and you were an executive head hunter comparing resumes, you would find Barak Obama, Mike Huckabee, Rudy Guliani and Mitt Romney woefully unqualified. Obama is the only oen of the lot with federal government experience. Huckabee and Mitt Romney were state governors, Guliani was a US attorney and a mayor. Obama is a junior senator.

McCain and Clinton are the only two viable candidates with strong federal government experience. Period.

And sorry, Thompson. I know you were a Senator, but you don't get to leave public office to pursue a career in acting and decide one day it would be awesome to run for President. You're an embarassment.

PapaBear

01-21-2008, 09:59 PM

American government has changed much in the past few decades, and I agree that a modern President should have Federal Government experience. But the weird thing is, The only Presidents elected in the last 40 years, who had any federal experience were Nixon and HW Bush. The rest have been Governors. I never could figure that part out. I guess it's that whole idea of brining in an "outsider for change".

CruelCircus

01-22-2008, 12:53 AM

American government has changed much in the past few decades, and I agree that a modern President should have Federal Government experience. But the weird thing is, The only Presidents elected in the last 40 years, who had any federal experience were Nixon and HW Bush. The rest have been Governors. I never could figure that part out. I guess it's that whole idea of brining in an "outsider for change".

The reason for this, accurate or not, is the perception that Senators and Congressmen are "middle management" where Governors, especially big state governors, at least have "executive level" experience. They know how to run a large government.

Personally, I do think there is something to that, but I wouldn't immediately dismiss a Senator as a candidate. It's a matter of which you feel is most important- federal vs. executive experience.

FMJeff

01-22-2008, 08:05 AM

The reason for this, accurate or not, is the perception that Senators and Congressmen are "middle management" where Governors, especially big state governors, at least have "executive level" experience. They know how to run a large government.

Personally, I do think there is something to that, but I wouldn't immediately dismiss a Senator as a candidate. It's a matter of which you feel is most important- federal vs. executive experience.

Well, other things come into play. Foreign policy experience. Military experience. McCain is stronger than all of the other candidates in those areas.

A.J.

02-08-2008, 09:34 AM

Bump

Yerdaddy

02-08-2008, 10:50 PM

Bump

Your lovely lady lumps?

epo

02-08-2008, 10:54 PM

Your lovely lady lumps?

http://styletraxx.com/Fergie.jpg

Who would have ever thought a John McCain thread would turn into this?

keithy_19

02-09-2008, 12:45 AM

http://styletraxx.com/Fergie.jpg

Who would have ever thought a John McCain thread would turn into this?

I hate her.

:down:

scottinnj

02-09-2008, 04:19 AM

http://styletraxx.com/Fergie.jpg

Who would have ever thought a John McCain thread would turn into this?

I hate her.

:down:

Fergie? I'd bang her.

But more importantly, this is for epo-that post about McCain = Bush = Democrat win, please, please don't relax until the election is over. Never assume, never!

sailor

02-09-2008, 05:38 AM

some VP candidate speculation (http://slate.com/blogs/blogs/trailhead/archive/2008/02/08/pick-your-vice.aspx).

A.J.

02-09-2008, 09:19 AM

Bump

Your lovely lady lumps?

I said I told you I was gonna bump like this. Y'all didn't think that I could bump like this.

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/eDlnzhBH0dA&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/eDlnzhBH0dA&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

epo

02-09-2008, 02:19 PM

Ten years ago, John McCain told a joke about Chelsea Clinton. The media thought it was so mean they edited....except for Salon. Now it's hitting the wires again:

"Why is Chelsea Clinton so ugly?
Because her father is Janet Reno."

Link to original story here. (http://www.salon.com/news/1998/06/25newsb.html)

NortonRules

02-09-2008, 02:25 PM

Ignorant? Seems like people love to throw around that word.

Based on the numbers, how high would you say his chances are of even getting the nomination? Sure, he'll gain some ground in the bible belt, I'm sure, but people want a change.

Delegates
Romney 66
McCain 38
Huckabee 26
Thompson 8
Paul 6
Giuliani 1
Hunter 1

Huckabee's one of the last two standing. It's February 9th. It's not likely, but he's still got a chance, unfortunately. I foresee Huck vs Hil and it makes me nauseus.

ToLEEdo

02-09-2008, 05:13 PM

Does anyone else besides me like the fact that he doesn't blindly follow his party lines and does what he feels is the correct thing to do. I know everyone has to pander to their party for the nomination but it is nice to see someone who is willing to go outside their party. I consider myself a Republican but I like someone who will do what they think is right.

thejives

02-20-2008, 07:49 PM

So... would you hit it?

http://cache.viewimages.com/xc/3077520.jpg?v=1&c=ViewImages&k=2&d=17A4AD9FDB9CF193B3EA2C03450C94867BD1FBDF0F862539 5A5397277B4DC33E

Would you change your Senate vote to favor the telecom industry to hit it?

Here's the NYT story. (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/21/us/politics/21mccain.html?_r=1&ex=1361250000&en=33711052dbdd623d&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss&oref=slogin)

PhilDeez

02-20-2008, 08:26 PM

She's an 11 compared to Monica...

This is really reaching. Bring up an 8 year old story, where both parties deny any wrong doing just weeks after you endorsed the guy??? This is horse crap.

PapaBear

02-20-2008, 08:31 PM

The only reason it would offend me if he did it, is if he DIDN'T do coke off her ass. If you're going to cheat, fucking go all the way.

Yerdaddy

02-20-2008, 11:05 PM

She's an 11 compared to Monica...

This is really reaching. Bring up an 8 year old story, where both parties deny any wrong doing just weeks after you endorsed the guy??? This is horse crap.

The endorsement doesn't play into it for two reasons:

8. Endorsements are made by the editorial boards, which are separate from the hard news division of professional news organizations.

nipple) Legitimate news organizations are not advocay organizations, and as such, if their editorial boards endorse a candidate it should have no bearing on the decision to report on news pertaining to that candidate. That's the evolutionary state of contemporary journalism ethics that most American print media organizations are pretty good at practicing, while television and cable news organizations, especially those owned by "News" Corp. are a throwback to the cromagnon yellow journalism days of William Randolph Hearst.

A.J.

02-21-2008, 03:59 AM

The endorsement doesn't play into it for two reasons:

8. Endorsements are made by the editorial boards, which are separate from the hard news division of professional news organizations.

nipple) Legitimate news organizations are not advocay organizations, and as such, if their editorial boards endorse a candidate it should have no bearing on the decision to report on news pertaining to that candidate. That's the evolutionary state of contemporary journalism ethics that most American print media organizations are pretty good at practicing, while television and cable news organizations, especially those owned by "News" Corp. are a throwback to the cromagnon yellow journalism days of William Randolph Hearst.

Talk about a nipple slip.

PhilDeez

02-21-2008, 04:05 AM

The endorsement doesn't play into it for two reasons:

8. Endorsements are made by the editorial boards, which are separate from the hard news division of professional news organizations.

nipple) Legitimate news organizations are not advocay organizations, and as such, if their editorial boards endorse a candidate it should have no bearing on the decision to report on news pertaining to that candidate. That's the evolutionary state of contemporary journalism ethics that most American print media organizations are pretty good at practicing, while television and cable news organizations, especially those owned by "News" Corp. are a throwback to the cromagnon yellow journalism days of William Randolph Hearst.

That is fair enough and I understand, but why rehash a story that is 8 years old?

Yerdaddy

02-21-2008, 05:28 AM

That is fair enough and I understand, but why rehash a story that is 8 years old?

I don't know. Once I saw it was about a possible marital affair I did the patriotic thing and stopped reading.

Zorro

02-21-2008, 06:06 AM

The endorsement doesn't play into it for two reasons:

8. Endorsements are made by the editorial boards, which are separate from the hard news division of professional news organizations.

nipple) Legitimate news organizations are not advocay organizations, and as such, if their editorial boards endorse a candidate it should have no bearing on the decision to report on news pertaining to that candidate. That's the evolutionary state of contemporary journalism ethics that most American print media organizations are pretty good at practicing, while television and cable news organizations, especially those owned by "News" Corp. are a throwback to the cromagnon yellow journalism days of William Randolph Hearst.

Having become a recent viewer of MSNBC I can confirm yellow journalism is back. Dan Abrams was salivating over himself while doing the McCain story last night.

Bulldogcakes

02-21-2008, 03:19 PM

some VP candidate speculation (http://slate.com/blogs/blogs/trailhead/archive/2008/02/08/pick-your-vice.aspx).

Of that list, I hope he picks Romney. Politically it makes no sense, but McCain's pretty weak on economic issues. As VP Romney could be an asset.

Bulldogcakes

02-21-2008, 03:52 PM

Legitimate news organizations are not advocay organizations, and as such, if their editorial boards endorse a candidate it should have no bearing on the decision to report on news pertaining to that candidate. That's the evolutionary state of contemporary journalism ethics that most American print media organizations are pretty good at practicing, while television and cable news organizations, especially those owned by "News" Corp. are a throwback to the cromagnon yellow journalism days of William Randolph Hearst.

Sorry, thats sounds great in theory but in practice its a joke. At least the Fox News types are up front with their bias/take. The Times claims to be neutral and is anything but. In much of Europe, Israel, and many other nations you have the Socialist newspaper, The Left/Right wing newspaper, the workers newspaper, Catholic newspaper, etc etc. And they're upfront and honest about who they are. Here we have a media culture which claims on the one hand to be neutral, and yet if you press them they'll tell you its IMPOSSIBLE to take bias out of journalism and still sell newspapers. Unbiased journalism would read like the AP Wire. Boilerplate, boring, facts and figures with no analysis whatsoever. Once you add any analysis or do editing of any kind you have exercised bias of some kind. I'll give the Times credit for presenting more facts than Fox does, who will often only present the facts that support their agenda. But the Times is simply more subtle about their agenda than Fox is. They'll present all of the facts available but weight the piece so the reader comes to what they believe to be the correct conclusion. If you're a reader who politically is center-left, you'll trust the NY Times. If you're a reader who's center-right, you generally don't.

Bulldogcakes

02-21-2008, 05:01 PM

Ugh, just posted this in the wrong thread. Here it is again.

New Republic article on the NYTimes piece (http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=8b7675e4-36de-43f5-afdd-2a2cd2b96a24)

Beyond its revelations, however, what's most remarkable about the article is that it appeared in the paper at all: The new information it reveals focuses on the private matters of the candidate, and relies entirely on the anecdotal evidence of McCain's former staffers to justify the piece--both personal and anecdotal elements unusual in the Gray Lady. The story is filled with awkward journalistic moves--the piece contains a collection of decade-old stories about McCain and Iseman appearing at functions together and concerns voiced by McCain's aides that the Senator shouldn't be seen in public with Iseman--and departs from the Times' usual authoritative voice. At one point, the piece suggestively states: "In 1999 she began showing up so frequently in his offices and at campaign events that staff members took notice. One recalled asking, 'Why is she always around?'" In the absence of concrete, printable proof that McCain and Iseman were an item, the piece delicately steps around purported romance and instead reports on the debate within the McCain campaign about the alleged affair.

What happened? The publication of the article capped three months of intense internal deliberations at the Times over whether to publish the negative piece and its most explosive charge about the affair. It pitted the reporters investigating the story, who believed they had nailed it, against executive editor Bill Keller, who believed they hadn't. It likely cost the paper one investigative reporter, who decided to leave in frustration. And the Times ended up publishing a piece in which the institutional tensions about just what the story should be are palpable

Pretty much mirrors my initial reaction to it. Shouldn't have gone with it. Not much there.

scottinnj

02-21-2008, 05:28 PM

So... would you hit it?

http://cache.viewimages.com/xc/3077520.jpg?v=1&c=ViewImages&k=2&d=17A4AD9FDB9CF193B3EA2C03450C94867BD1FBDF0F862539 5A5397277B4DC33E

Would you change your Senate vote to favor the telecom industry to hit it?

Here's the NYT story. (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/21/us/politics/21mccain.html?_r=1&ex=1361250000&en=33711052dbdd623d&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss&oref=slogin)

Wasn't she the "classy" closing act in "Seduced by a Cougar 5?" Or was it the office scene she teamed up with Nina Hartley to bang the clueless UPS driver?

scottinnj

02-21-2008, 05:34 PM

The endorsement doesn't play into it for two reasons:

8. Endorsements are made by the editorial boards, which are separate from the hard news division of professional news organizations.

Nipple slip aside, since I was in the wrong thread too (Thanks Bulldogcakes!) my question is this:

If Keller knew the story was being vetted for preparation of being published, wouldn't he at least warn the editorial board it existed and ask them to reconsider their endorsement? If the story got published, and this is a big one, he would have had some say whether it got published or not. Which means he believes the story on some level. Doesn't he have a responsibility to make sure the paper doesn't seem schizophrenic, endorsing a candidate that it believes is corrupt, or at least in an inappropriate relationship that would disqualify him being fit for President?

foodcourtdruide

02-21-2008, 06:49 PM

Ok, this is not meant to knock McCains chick, she's beautiful, but tell me if I'm out of my fucking mind or you agree:

Doesn't John McCain's wife's mannerisms resemble an alien that is wearing a humans skin?

scottinnj

02-21-2008, 06:57 PM

Ok, this is not meant to knock McCains chick, she's beautiful, but tell me if I'm out of my fucking mind or you agree:

Doesn't John McCain's wife's mannerisms resemble an alien that is wearing a humans skin?

My wife said the same thing, but it was because the camera was making her eyes glow like a cat looking at a flashlight. Creepy, but wood-inducing. McCain's a man's man for hitting an alien. We always trusted Captain Kirk, even when he was banging the green chicks with the bumpy skin tags. McCain will bring intergalactic peace for one and all and protect us from the Klingons.

JerseySean

02-21-2008, 08:04 PM

Ok, this is not meant to knock McCains chick, she's beautiful, but tell me if I'm out of my fucking mind or you agree:

Doesn't John McCain's wife's mannerisms resemble an alien that is wearing a humans skin?

That is funny. she reminds me of the alien chick from Mars Attacks

thejives

02-21-2008, 08:10 PM

If you want to see a bunch of family pics of the McCain clan, check out McCain's daughter's web site:
http://www.mccainblogette.com/

I'm not sure if Meghan is Cindy's daughter or McCain's daughter from the previous marriage that Cindy broke up. Either way, it looks like the fam is enjoying the campaign trail.

JerseySean

02-21-2008, 08:12 PM

If you want to see a bunch of family pics of the McCain clan, check out McCain's daughter's web site:
http://www.mccainblogette.com/

I'm not sure if Meghan is Cindy's daughter or McCain's daughter from the previous marriage that Cindy broke up. Either way, it looks like the fam is enjoying the campaign trail.

I would hit it

scottinnj

02-21-2008, 09:21 PM

I would hit it

At least we agree on one thing.

thejives

02-21-2008, 09:25 PM

you could even angle for a threeway with her and her asian friend.

Ohhh dougggieee...

JerseySean

02-21-2008, 09:30 PM

you could even angle for a threeway with her and her asian friend.

Ohhh dougggieee...

I'm not one for a chunky asian. 2 out of my first three in high school were that. Finished there, all you man