Jump to content
An Old School Catholic Message Board

What Does Mccain Stand For?


dairygirl4u2c

Recommended Posts

mccain wants to raise your taxes.

he molds himself as the pork and earmark veto-er. everyone disclikes it, but even if we grant him that point. are we sure that he won't irresponsibly cripple our legislature? pork is how they roll. isn't it sorta a fact of life? the annual budget is 2 trillion and he is worried about 20 billion in pork according to greenspan. in other words, the budget is 2000 and he's worried about 20 dollars. 20 billion is a lot, grated, but it's not a lot in the bigger picture.

according to the following, mccain doesn't look to intent on reducing spending that already exists, if history is any indicator.

according to greenspan, mccain wants to give 3.3 trillion dollar tax cuts. according to greenspan, to really pay for them, current spending would need reduced. but he's not all about that.

if he's like a lot of neocons like ron paul disses as worse than liberals, borrow and spend is worse than tax and spend.

reagan was basically ersponsible for 5 trillion in debt. bush jr was basically responsible for that much. they're the big debt culprits. so far that is for both of them considering interest, and not considering future debt from interest. and now mccain wants to be the next one with another five trillion apparenly.

he wants to give 2500 dollars per person that pays taxes, or 5000 per family. he basically wants to give them money. if obama said "i want to give every person 2500 that pays taxes" peole would see instantaly the irresponsibility. mccain, to be clearer wants tax credits, but we all know that's basically giving them money if spending isn't reduced. the difference between credits and deductions, is handouts. obama's plan, if it was gov ensured and not hand outs to insurance companies, depending on details which i concede are lacking, could in fact be more fiscally conservative than mccains.

[quote]List of budgetary spending priorities

* McCain would “maintain status” on spending for:AIDS programs
* Environmental programs
* Foreign aid
* Housing projects
* Job training programs
* Medicaid & Medicare
* Student loan programs

* McCain would “slightly increase” spending for:Education (K-12)
* Law enforcement
* Military & Veterans Benefits
* Border Control

* McCain would “slightly decrease” spending for: NASA
* Welfare

* McCain would eliminate spending for:Arts funding

Source: Project Vote Smart, 1998, www.vote-smart.org Jul 2, 1998[/quote]


so if all he stands for is borrow and spend, what exactly does he stand for that means anything?

Edited by dairygirl4u2c
Link to comment
Share on other sites

that and making the campaign into smears and lying.

[quote]John McCain and the Lying Game
By Joe Klein Wednesday, Sep. 17, 2008
TIME magazine

Politics has always been lousy with blather and chicanery. But there are rules and traditions too. In the early weeks of the general-election campaign, a consensus has grown in the political community — a consensus that ranges from practitioners like Karl Rove to commentators like, well, me — that John McCain has allowed his campaign to slip the normal bounds of political propriety. The situation has gotten so intense that we in the media have slipped our normal rules as well. Usually when a candidate tells something less than the truth, we mince words. We use euphemisms like mendacity and inaccuracy ... or, as the Associated Press put it, "McCain's claims skirt facts." But increasing numbers of otherwise sober observers, even such august institutions as the New York Times editorial board, are calling John McCain a liar. You might well ask, What has McCain done to deserve this? What unwritten rules did he break? Are his transgressions of degree or of kind?

Almost every politician stretches the truth. We journalists try to point out the exaggerations and criticize them, then let the voters decide. When McCain says, for example, that Barack Obama favors a government-run health-care system, he's not telling the truth — Obama wants a market-based system subsidized by the government — but McCain's untruth illuminates a general policy direction, which is sketchy but sort of within the bounds. (Obama's plan would increase government regulation of the drug and insurance industries.) Obama has done this sort of thing too. In July, he accused McCain of supporting the foreign buyout of an American company that could lead to the loss of about 8,000 jobs in Wilmington, Ohio. McCain did support the deal, but the job loss comes many years later and was not anticipated at the time. That, however, is where the moral equivalency between these two campaigns ends.

McCain's lies have ranged from the annoying to the sleazy, and the problem is in both degree and kind. His campaign has been a ceaseless assault on his opponent's character and policies, featuring a consistent—and witting—disdain for the truth. Even after 38 million Americans heard Obama say in his speech at the Democratic National Convention that he was open to offshore oil-drilling and building new nuclear-power plants, McCain flatly said in his acceptance speech that Obama opposed both. Normal political practice would be for McCain to say, "Obama says he's 'open to' offshore drilling, but he's always opposed it. How can we believe him?" This persistence in repeating demonstrably false charges is something new in presidential politics.

Worse than the lies have been the smears. McCain ran a television ad claiming that Obama favored "comprehensive" sex education for kindergartners. (Obama favored a bill that would have warned kindergartners about sexual predators and improper touching.) The accusation that Obama was referring to Sarah Palin when he said McCain's effort to remarket his economic policies was putting "lipstick on a pig" was another clearly misleading attack — an obnoxious attempt to divert attention from Palin's lack of fitness for the job and the recklessness with which McCain chose her. McCain's assault on the "élite media" for spreading rumors about Palin's personal life — actually, the culprits were a few bloggers and the tabloid press — was more of the same. And that gets us close to the real problem here. The McCain camp has decided that its candidate can't win honorably, on the issues, so it has resorted to transparent and phony diversions.

This new strategy emerged during the first week of Obama's overseas trip in late July. McCain had been intending to contrast his alleged foreign policy expertise and toughness with Obama's inexperience and alleged weakness. McCain wanted to "win" the Iraq war and face down the Iranians. But those issues became moot when the Iraqis said they favored Obama's withdrawal plan and the Bush Administration started talking to the Iranians. At that point, McCain committed his original sin — out of pique, I believe — questioning Obama's patriotism, saying the Democrat would rather lose a war than lose an election. Ever since, McCain's campaign has been a series of snide and demeaning ads accompanied by the daily gush of untruths that have now been widely documented and exposed. The strategy is an obvious attempt to camouflage the current unpopularity of his Republican brand, the insubstantiality of his vice-presidential choice, and his agreement on most issues — especially economic matters — with an exceedingly unpopular President.

The good news is that the vile times may be ending. The coming debates will decide this race, and it isn't easy to tell lies when your opponent is standing right next to you. The Wall Street collapse demands a more sober campaign as well. But these dreadful weeks should not be forgotten. John McCain has raised serious questions about whether he has the character to lead the nation. He has defaced his beloved military code of honor. He has run a dirty campaign.[/quote]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote]he wants to give 2500 dollars per person that pays taxes, or 5000 per family. he basically wants to give them money.[/quote]

can considering it'd be paid for in debt, it could well be twice that amount after interest. 5000 per indivudual and 10000 per family, he's just going to give money to them. per year. that's one of the most irresponsible things i've ever seen.

Edited by dairygirl4u2c
Link to comment
Share on other sites

i'm surprised no one's jumped in to wail about abortion.
it'd look kinda silly though if that's all anyone ever fell back on, without actually trying to defend anything else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

what does mccain stand for? um, ...

milk, corn, candy, and ink narcotics?
my colorful collection antiques is nice?
messengers could cancel any issue notwithstanding?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='princessgianna' post='1664654' date='Sep 26 2008, 09:15 PM']ok and Obama wants lil baby;s to die!!![/quote]

thaaat's the stuff

Link to comment
Share on other sites

princessgianna

[quote name='dairygirl4u2c' post='1664795' date='Sep 26 2008, 11:37 PM']thaaat's the stuff[/quote]
uhhh ok then if that is your whole point is to get me to say that i rather have babies than can grow up and with that some taxes (which seriously you think Obama will lower them :mellow: )

Edited by princessgianna
Link to comment
Share on other sites

princessgianna

[quote name='dairygirl4u2c' post='1664185' date='Sep 26 2008, 12:40 PM']mccain wants to raise your taxes.[/quote]
mccain also wants kids to have a chance to live and to be raised!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...