Lindaland
  Global Unity
  The Conservative Case Against John McCain

Post New Topic  Post A Reply
profile | register | preferences | faq | search

UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! next newest topic | next oldest topic
Author Topic:   The Conservative Case Against John McCain
jwhop
Knowflake

Posts: 2787
From: Madeira Beach, FL USA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted April 02, 2008 09:09 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for jwhop     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
The Conservative Case Against John McCain

Many conservatives, including me, don't like candidates who shift their positions on key issues to get themselves elected. Some of us consider it unethical and dishonest. Further, shifting positions on key issues is disquieting and leaves one wondering if what the candidate is saying now is what they will do once they're elected; or, will they revert to their original positions once they're in office.

McCain/Feingold was and is legislation to limit speech of citizens leading up to an election. Apparently, the elected want to keep getting elected and don't want citizens or citizens grass roots organizations rocking their boat near an election. So called main stream groups..unions for instance are exempt from the legislation. This legislation is clearly Unconstitutional and violates citizens and citizens groups 1st Amendment rights. The US Supreme Court disagrees with that assessment. On what basis they disagree, I can't fathom. Bush said he signed the legislation believing the Supreme Court would strike it down as unconstitutional. McCain lobbied hard insisting the legislation would limit the amount of money in elections. This legislation produced exactly the opposite result. McCain was the Republican driving force behind the legislation and conservatives aren't going to forget it.

John McCain voted against the Bush tax cuts calling them "tax cuts for the rich". Gee, we could have heard that from any leftist in America...and have. McCain was dead wrong on the effects tax cuts would have on an economy in recession and Bush was right on. Tax cuts work to make the economy boom every time it's done. Even the Sec Treasury Bush chose was against tax cuts. Again, Bush was right and an economist Secretary of Treasury was wrong. Now, McCain says he supports making the Bush tax cuts permanent. Lots of conservatives really wonder about that given his adamant opposition. Instead of opposing tax cuts, McCain should have moved heaven and earth to limit Congressional spending. To give McCain credit where it's due, he's done that. But spending cuts are impossible because of the entitlement programs which consume about 60% of the federal budget of the United States and are obligations of the United States. A mixed bag here but the main theme is that McCain opposed the very plan which would work to end the recession and did end the recession and that in spite of the attacks of 9/11 which further knocked the props out from under the economy.

Amnesty for illegal aliens is an issue with conservatives. When John McCain pushed the Bush plan, he drew the ire of conservatives and not only conservatives but about 70% of Americans are dead set against it. First, no one believes the government numbers of 11,000,000 illegal aliens in America. It could be 20,000.000 or more. Further, the legislation would have permitted those granted citizenship to bring their mothers, fathers, sisters, brothers, aunts and uncles to the United States, which could be another 30,000,000 or more. Second, rewarding those who have already broken our immigration laws only encourages more of the same. After granting amnesty and citizenship to illegal aliens, there would be another assault on our borders and agitation to make them citizens too. They would have an excellent point.

McCain was a moving force for and in the so called "Gang of 14". 7 Democrats and 7 Republicans who interfered with Republican intentions to go to the US Supreme Court for a ruling on Senate filibusters of judicial nominees. This was called the "Nuclear Option". Democrats were filibustering Bush judicial nominees and the Gang of 14 headed off any resolution of the constitutional question. The Constitution gives the Senate the right of advise and consent on judicial nominations by the President but the right to filibuster and neither advise, reject or consent is not found there. This is a constitutional question which needs to be settled once and for all. Both Republicans and Democrats have filibustered judicial nominations to the howling and shrieking of the other party. It seems to conservatives that McCain values the rules of the Senate...which are passed by the Senate and without legislation...over the authority of the Constitution.

John McCain supports federal funding for embryonic stem cell research. There is no law prohibiting embryonic stem cell research by private sector research labs using their own money. These labs have shunned embryonic stem cell research and have concentrated on "adult stem cell research, spending their own money to do so. In tests, embryonic stem cell injections/infusions produce brain tumors in a high percentage of instances. On the other hand, adult stem cell therapies have and are producing startling results, read cures, for some of the most debilitating diseases known to humans. The difference is that no embryos need be destroyed using adult cells and adult cells produce cures where embryonic stem cells produce brain tumors. Given McCains ranting about government overspending and wasting tax payer money, we wonder why McCain is on the wrong side of this issue...which is deeply resented by conservatives.

John McCain is on the side of the man made global warming crackpots. This is one of the most hyped issues in memory. With all the scientists who have parted ways with the so called scientists who support the hoax, we wonder what McCain could possibly be thinking. Eventually, if the UN gets it's way, there will be a treaty giving the UN control over US energy policy, production and usage. This is death for the US economy and a surrender of US sovereignty over US territory. This issue alone would be sufficient to torpedo McCain...if there was a viable alternative for whom to vote. But Obama and Hillary are on board the same issue so, many conservatives will hold their noses and vote for McCain.

I don't care that McCain sometimes works with Democrats, so long as he holds on to his wallet and doesn't get the idea his job is to get along with Democrats. As a Senator, McCain should be representing the best interests of his constituents and the United States. Getting along with Democrats is far down the list of jobs McCain was sent to Congress to accomplish. As President, the scope of the job expands to cover representation of all Americans, their best interests and the best interests of the United States in both domestic and foreign policy. Some conservatives wonder if McCain sees the job(s) the same way.

IP: Logged

venusdeindia
unregistered
posted April 03, 2008 12:54 AM           Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
damn, i had just decided HE was the right man for the job
but u've gotta admit he IS the lesser Evil, hell the other two .....

IP: Logged

blue moon
Knowflake

Posts: 1344
From: U.K
Registered: Apr 2009

posted April 03, 2008 11:43 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for blue moon     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Politicians normally wait until after they have been elected before they "shift their positions on key issues".

IP: Logged

thirteen
unregistered
posted April 03, 2008 12:55 PM           Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
jwhop, who would you be most comforatble with in office?
I am conservative so there is my ultimate answer but i confess, i would be very curious to see what either democrat would do in office.

IP: Logged

jwhop
Knowflake

Posts: 2787
From: Madeira Beach, FL USA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted April 28, 2008 12:44 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for jwhop     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
thirteen, sorry I missed your question and then this thread got buried.

You ask a good question...who would I be most comfortable with in office.

Certainly not the Marxist Socialist Hillary Clinton and the dregs of American society with whom she and her corrupt husband surround themselves.

Certainly not the Marxist Socialist O'Bomber and the dregs of American society with whom he surrounds himself with...and whose advice he seeks as his gurus.

Not John McCain either and for the reasons set forth above.

This will surprise some because of his position on the Iraq War but Ron Paul would be an ideal President for those who want the United States Constitution upheld and followed by the United States government.

Ron Paul would move heaven and earth to ax the Federal Reserve. He would institute a currency issued and controlled by the Congress of the United States...as the Constitution requires.

Ron Paul would seek the outright repeal of the 16th Amendment which most people believe authorized an "income" tax on their wages and salaries, but didn't. A "National Sales Tax"..a Constitutional tax on consumption would take it's place.

Ron Paul would take a chainsaw to the federal agencies which the US Constitution never authorized and still doesn't authorize.

Ron Paul would transfer back to the states the responsibilities encroached by the federal government...10th Amendment.

In short, Ron Paul would run the Executive Branch of government not with personality but by the book..as it should be run and hasn't been run; not even by Ronald Reagan.

I doubt Ron Paul would be able to end the Iraq War. The result of that would be a disaster.

But, you can bet your life there would be no more wars with the US as a participant unless and until the Congress of the United States voted a "Declaration of War"...instead of a "Resolution" authorizing military action.

Surprised?


IP: Logged

jwhop
Knowflake

Posts: 2787
From: Madeira Beach, FL USA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted April 28, 2008 12:48 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for jwhop     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Now Mannu, where the hell are you?

You asked why I am forever on the case of leftist demoscats but never have anything negative to say about Republicans. This thread was in response to your question.

And then Mannu, when I did, you went missing in action on that issue.

IP: Logged

jwhop
Knowflake

Posts: 2787
From: Madeira Beach, FL USA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted April 28, 2008 02:31 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for jwhop     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
bump

IP: Logged

Mannu
Knowflake

Posts: 45
From: always here and no where
Registered: Apr 2009

posted April 28, 2008 04:06 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Mannu     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Your negative of McCain is more a negative of democrats rather than negatives of republican values in todays time - LOL

You are lucky that there is no negative of new-con values required in todays economy situation, of course excluding the war policies. I have to dig hard if I were to find one. That is :

Low taxes in recession is a positive

Sustaining capitalism by applying same standards for all tax brackets ...perhaps not a great idea because how will government fill its treasure to reduce its deficits?

Did warring with Iraq generate any tangible wealth? Is it going to offset the war spending?

Perhaps they are counting on Iraq funding its own war and subsidising oil to America. Else where I mentioned 19 percent of oil coming from mid-east(note not all from iraq though). How much subsidy is that in terms of dollar value?

Gas price will never fall now that these people are already saying it must be parallel to barrell of oil.

So yeah a neo-con president with the congress declaring the war if it had to will be great for America. The congress is majority dems today so there must be a really great reason for the congress to declare war.

So your choice of Ron Paul sounds rationale.

How can he compete as a republican though? Isn't it late?

I think now its time to say that one of Blue roamers graph showing reduced deficit was because of neo-con actions taken during the 90's by the republicans. Bill clinton was simply the beneficiary and infact he "stole" money from SSN.
I am now going to be axed by the leftist here


BTW, I do not understand your comments on federal reserve. Wasn't that created when wall street people wanted to manage their bail out process and the dems interfered saying let government handle it. Any how will look in to it.

IP: Logged

Mannu
Knowflake

Posts: 45
From: always here and no where
Registered: Apr 2009

posted April 29, 2008 08:26 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Mannu     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I am not dismissing Mc cain still.

$5000 family credit for health insurance.
Proving the US government has money in its treasury to go socialist for a while

Wow - he is indeed a different republican.


IP: Logged

Mannu
Knowflake

Posts: 45
From: always here and no where
Registered: Apr 2009

posted April 29, 2008 11:03 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Mannu     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
>>I am now going to be axed by the leftist here

(*that sentence was edited)
Geez- wish I had PA to type what I say.

IP: Logged

All times are Eastern Standard Time

next newest topic | next oldest topic

Administrative Options: Close Topic | Archive/Move | Delete Topic
Post New Topic  Post A Reply
Hop to:

Contact Us | Linda-Goodman.com

Copyright © 2011

Powered by Infopop www.infopop.com © 2000
Ultimate Bulletin Board 5.46a