Why so anti-McCain?

So yeah madmag, what didn't he answer?
Click to expand...

Obvious. He danced around what this guy really stands for....open borders. Read above links in my other posts. Either McCain knows but he did not want to answer, or we are to believe that this is a trend were he hires people without knowing their background or agenda. McCain played dumb that he did not know about Hernadez's polices, but He (Hernadez) has been all over national TV giving his views for anyone to listen. McCain's answer was he would check into this guys credentials. Well that should be easy to do even for McCain. No straight talk here...he was busted.

Listen to the question. The lady asked him if he (McCain) agreed with the polices of the man he hired. McCain said that the guy he hired agreed with McCain's policies....that's not what the lady asked....big difference!
 
No matter what he says now
Click to expand...

You are going to have a very hard time finding someone to vote for.

McCain has changed his mind on illegal immigration.

Huckabee has changed his mind on illegal immigration.

Romney has changed his mind about everything (at least once).

Ron Paul hasn't changed his mind, but doesn't have a chance, apparently because he has never changed his mind.
 
You are going to have a very hard time finding someone to vote for.
Click to expand...

You are probably right. But why on earth would I vote for a man who teamed up with Sen. Kennedy on a bill which provided amnesty for illegal aliens, and whom the Seattle PI calls "a powerful new voice in the Senate" who sides with "gun-control advocates" ?
 
Can't really remember too many slam dunk decisions in the booth. Even when I thought it was a slam dunk for gun owners it never turned out that way :(
 
Romney has changed his mind about everything (at least once).
Click to expand...

But Romney said that he now considers his past positions to be wrong.

That is different from trying to act like you did not hold a previous position.

I have not heard McCain discuss Amnesty, Open Borders, Campaign Finance Reform, Gang of 14, etc
 
McCain may be for open borders, but that doesn't necessarily mean he's for insecure borders. While I disagree with his amnesty plan, you can't say his plan of making it incredibly easy to get into the USA legally is tantamount to leaving the borders open and insecure and not concerning ourselves with who crosses them. Saying that you can either secure the borders or heavily restrict immigration is a false dilemma, so unless you can pull up proposals McCain has made to turn a blind eye to who's entering the country, please concentrate your fire on how open he wants the borders to be, not how insecure.

And madmag: McCain may not have said that he disagreed with the man, but he did say what he personally believed in, as well as saying he wasn't entirely aware of the more radical positions the man pushed when he wasn't helping McCain's campaign. If you ask me if my jacket is yellow, and I tell you that I think yellow is a revolting color and I would never own anything that's yellow, I would consider myself not only having answered your question but having told you more about what I believe.
 
so unless you can pull up proposals McCain has made to turn a blind eye to who's entering the country, please concentrate your fire on how open he wants the borders to be, not how insecure
Click to expand...

My beef all along with Sen. McCain has been his amnesty and immigration policy with regard to illegal aliens already in the country. I never said otherwise.
 
I'm not really speaking to any specific individuals with that comment (okay, there are a couple on the front page of the thread), but I do get tired of hearing people say that McCain wants insecure borders when what he wants are open borders. Some people make the distinction, but many do not...
 
McCain may be for open borders, but that doesn't necessarily mean he's for insecure borders....
Click to expand...

I don't believe I would apply that logic to my own front door, next time I go on vacaton for a couple of weeks.
 
But Romney said that he now considers his past positions to be wrong.
Click to expand...

His past positions were wrong because he now running for a national office, not an office in the great liberal hell hole of Massachussets.

A 50+ year old man should have it well worked out in his mind how he feels about guns and abortion. I can understand a teenager changing their mind, or even a young adult. But by 50, basic moral issues should be pretty solid in your mind.

Either he is really dumb and never thought about these things, or he is simply changing his mind to appeal to mainstream national voters. I don't trust him.

McCain at least doesn't flip flop. He was in favor of amnesty then, and he is in favor of amnesty now, he just knows he can't get it passed.

I would rather be stuck with a devil I can predict than a devil I cannot predict.
 
Sarge said:
I don't believe I would apply that logic to my own front door, next time I go on vacaton for a couple of weeks.
Click to expand...
That's leaving your front door insecure. When somebody tells you "my door is always open" that doesn't necessarily mean you don't need to knock before you go talk to them. :D
 
In 1974 he left a toilet seat up.
Click to expand...

So you're saying he's like Hillary? :)

McCain is too close to Kennedy for my taste.
Romney, well, suffice it to say I doubt anybody could run for dogcatcher in MA without Kennedy's permission.
Giuliani shouldn't need any further explanation.
That pretty much leaves Ron Paul at this point. I wish Fred had made a better showing, but it's too late for that now.
 
That might very well be because he considers such unskilled and low-paid workers needing to pay a $2,000 fine to be a fair punishment, whereas amnesty is simply saying "You know what? It's all good."

More incongruous is his fairly heavy pro-life stance (complete with supporting an anti-abortion amendment to the constitution while claiming to be a federalist, meaning abortion weighs rather heavily in his sense of morality) while trying to claim that in the short-term (or even long-term) he doesn't want to overturn Roe v. Wade which even in college now they're teaching was a poorly-written opinion.

I'm not going to be an apologist for McCain, as the man has his faults (very open borders, constitutional amendment against abortion, completely nullifying the full faith and credit clause for gay marriage, constitutional amendment against flag burning, and ever the politician). However, I'm going to have to go with Seth Myers (as John Kerry) from Saturday Night Live: "That's not flip-flopping, that's pandering, and America deserves a president who knows the difference!"

We need less hate on McCain, as he is not only the most electable Republican by virture of being a moderate (and therefore able to peel away independent voters away from the Democrats), but he's...

Oh, who am I kidding? Drag out McCain-Feingold, his lax immigration policy, and everything he's done with guns other than toe the "zero restrictions!" line. Have fun, I'll be sure to check in with you when Barack is getting sworn in.
 
Don't forget McCain was one of the Keating 5!

And the only Republican of the Keating 5. He has always seemed like a Democrat to me and I don't believe him now on his positions. I think he realizes it is now or never and that he is saying what it takes to win.

On the Keating 5:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keating_Five

In 1989, the Lincoln Savings and Loan Association of Irvine, Calif., collapsed. Lincoln's chairman, Charles H. Keating Jr., was faulted for the thrift's failure. Keating, however, told the House Banking Committee that the FHLBB and its former chief Edwin J. Gray were pursuing a vendetta against him. Gray testified that several U.S. senators had approached him and requested that he ease off on the Lincoln investigation. It came out that these senators had been beneficiaries of $1.3 million (collective total) in campaign contributions from Keating.

This allegation set off a series of investigations by the California government, the United States Department of Justice, and the Senate Ethics Committee. The ethics committee's investigation focused on five senators: Alan Cranston (D-CA); Dennis DeConcini (D-AZ); John Glenn (D-OH); John McCain (R-AZ); and Donald W. Riegle, Jr. (D-MI), who became known as the Keating Five.
Click to expand...
 
This allegation set off a series of investigations by the California government, the United States Department of Justice, and the Senate Ethics Committee. The ethics committee's investigation focused on five senators: Alan Cranston (D-CA); Dennis DeConcini (D-AZ); John Glenn (D-OH); John McCain (R-AZ); and Donald W. Riegle, Jr. (D-MI), who became known as the Keating Five.
Click to expand...

Interesting. The committee recommended censure for Cranston and criticized the other four for "questionable conduct."

That same reference goes on to say that:

McCain also remained in the Senate and he made campaign finance reform a key legislative interest. The scandal was followed by a number of attempts to adopt campaign finance reform -- spearheaded by U.S. Sen. David Boren (D-OK) -- but most attempts died in committee. A weakened reform was passed in 1993. Substantial campaign finance reform was not passed until the adoption of the McCain-Feingold Act in 2002.
Click to expand...
 
From McCain's own state of Arizona.


http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/news/articles/1108mccain-immig1108.html

From the article:
McCain gave him the same answer that he has given many times since the defeat of the Senate bill: that he learned his lesson.

"I will secure the borders before we do anything else," McCain said. "The borders have to be secured. I got the message. Got it."
Click to expand...

Spoken like a true say anything to get elected politician. If you believe that McCain will really fight to secure our borders than I have some ocean front property in Arizona I can sell you. Not to mention he should have thought we should have secure borders without his constituents telling him so. Now that he wants to get votes he really gets it...great!

Any candidate or President has to take on the responsibility for the people they hire. When McCain hired Hernadez he knew full well that Hernadez is a long time open border advocate that would not lift a finger to secure our borders, or pass on any message from McCain to secure our borders.
 
McCain recently stated that if president, he would sign the McCain-Kennedy bill if it showed up on his desk. He then quickly stated "but that's not going to happen". What the heck does that mean?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top