McCain's Speech

[SSJup81]

Originally Posted by Asakura

I dunno man, I've seen all the speeches and seen both sides of the story. And I still don't know who I agree with. I don't know why either. All I ever get is the parties trying to make the other look bad, trying to mudsling, why can't we be unified, and not divided, give consessions and make compromises.

Obama's said as much, but was labeled a "flip-flopper" because of it. He has mentioned compromise on issues.

[samurai007]

And McCain has spent his entire life putting his country first, not himself or his party. He has a long history of working with Democrats to co-author and pass bills, and he is the most centrist Republican in the Senate, having voted with his fellow Republicans only 57% of the time in 2006. He has stood up to and opposed fellow Republicans very vocally, on everything from immigration to campagn funding to the Iraq War.

By contrast, Barack is the most liberal Democrat in the Senate, voting with his own party over 95% of the time. The only bill he worked with Republicans on was a no-brainer that was easily passed by voice vote alone, nothing contentious at all. Barack has never stood up against his own party while in the Senate, and never sided with the opposition against them on anything of any importance. In fact, he very often doesn't even vote at all, just responding with "present!", as if they were taking roll call in school, not deciding matters of great importance to the country.

If unity matters to you, then select the candidate who puts country first, and whose convention shouted "USA!", instead of the candidate who is only in it for himself and who loves to hear his own name being shouted, not his country's...

[Asakura]

Maby I'm frustrated that's all. I just want the best for the country I live in.
America I don't think is the problem, I'm also frustrated that, I can't actually vote, the day of the election is one day after my 18th birthday.

[fluffy0000]

Nothing more creepy than chants of 'usa'. pls. view " Triumph of the Will" Directed by Leni Riefenstahl. With Adolf Hitler. The infamous propaganda film of the 1934 Nazi Party rally in ... etc.
John McCain and his PR handlers have been shoveling this same maverick republican schtick since beer was served in buckets. For over 36yrs John McCain has been in the congress and never failed too help hiimself or special interests that pay enough. You could ask Charles Keating but he's dead about John McCain putting his country first , especially bailing out the S&L Industry after John and his fellow senators 'Keating 5' helped Charlie Keating and company loot the Savings and Loan Industry back in the 80's. According to Congressional Quarterly's party unity scores, which track how often members of Congress side with their party on key votes, over the course of his career McCain has voted with his party 84 percent of the time—not the highest score in the Senate but hardly evidence of a great deal of independence. Similarly, the American Conservative Union gives McCain a lifetime rating of 82.3, making him a solid friend of the right's. And according to the widely respected Poole-Rosenthal rankings, McCain was the eighth-most conservative senator in the 110th Senate.

[Wasabista]

There was indeed a time when John McCain was a maverick. I wish we still lived in those times.

The man who once opposed torture has now voted in favor of it. The man who once favored extending due process to the hostages of Guantanamo Bay has changed his mind, supporting this direct violation of international treaties and therefore of American law. Campaign finance reform? The fight against earmarking? Amnesty for illegal immigrants? Opposition to tax cuts that favor the rich? Distant memories now.

[MMM]

Originally Posted by samurai007

And McCain has spent his entire life putting his country first, not himself or his party. He has a long history of working with Democrats to co-author and pass bills, and he is the most centrist Republican in the Senate, having voted with his fellow Republicans only 57% of the time in 2006. He has stood up to and opposed fellow Republicans very vocally, on everything from immigration to campagn funding to the Iraq War.

By contrast, Barack is the most liberal Democrat in the Senate, voting with his own party over 95% of the time. The only bill he worked with Republicans on was a no-brainer that was easily passed by voice vote alone, nothing contentious at all. Barack has never stood up against his own party while in the Senate, and never sided with the opposition against them on anything of any importance. In fact, he very often doesn't even vote at all, just responding with "present!", as if they were taking roll call in school, not deciding matters of great importance to the country.

If unity matters to you, then select the candidate who puts country first, and whose convention shouted "USA!", instead of the candidate who is only in it for himself and who loves to hear his own name being shouted, not his country's...

Most liberal? That's a matter of opinion. As a Democrat I do like that he votes with my Democrat beliefs, where McCain is all over the board. No wonder only 25% of Republicans are committed to McCain's nomination, where 65%+ are behind Obama.

McCain appeals to the middle? Maybe that was true until he made his choice of Vice-President. She is more conservative than Obama is liberal. No abortions, even if in the cases of rape or incest? God supports the war in Iraq? Polar bears aren't endangered if they get in the way of oil drilling? Very extreme views.

Obama has never voted "present" in the US Senate. That is not an option. Check your facts on that one.


And tell me, why do Republicans chant "USA!" as a battle-cry against the Democrats? I thought you said McCain and the Republicans were trying to UNIFY America. The way those chants were used at the RNC implied that Democrats aren't patriotic and aren't true Americans. That is despicable and pathetic.

Fear-mongering or hope? Negative name-calling or positive unifying?

Fake "change" or real change.

It's not hard for me to decide.

[Sutiiven]

now about Obama how does everyone going about for him if he said he he will not fully give commitment to the U.S or stand behind but be president?

[MMM]

Originally Posted by Tenchu

I think it is funny, though, that Obama got an old man to fill in the experience gap, as vice president, which McCain outstands on. And McCain gets a women for vice president nomination to try and sway people in support of female or black rule.

Do people think these people were chosen solely because of their qualities (the vice president nominees), or was there a bit of planning behind it?

It would be unfortunate if it is more staged to attract appeal rather than eminate as a strong and capable leader. Only shows the US to be more interested in fantasies than realities.

Obama's choice in VP was obvious, and not surprising.

McCain's was a clear reaction to that. Is that how VPs should be chosen? In his own words he said the first priority of choosing a VP is someone who is ready to take over as President. Sarah Palin is not that person. It is clear she wasn't vetted at all, and was a rash decision.

[MMM]

Originally Posted by Sutiiven

now about Obama how does everyone going about for him if he said he he will not fully give commitment to the U.S or stand behind but be president?

I don't understand the question.

[Sutiiven]

How do the people go about on the voting for him like earlier when he said that he will not stand behind or fully give commitment to the U.S don't that effect the voting ?