Comments on: McCain Criticizes Obama Over NAFTA

In Speech In Canada, Republican Suggests Rival "Retreating Behind Protectionist Walls"

[king_quest]

* McCain went from saying he would not support repeal of [tag]Roe v. Wade[/tag] to saying the exact opposite.

* McCain criticized TV preacher [tag]Jerry Falwell[/tag] as %u201Can agent of intolerance%u201D in 2002, but has since decided to cozy up to the man who said Americans %u201Cdeserved%u201D the 9/11 attacks. (Indeed, McCain has now hired Falwell%u2019s debate coach.)

* McCain used to oppose Bush%u2019s [tag]tax cuts[/tag] for the very wealthy, but he reversed course in February.

* In 2000, McCain accused Texas businessmen Sam and Charles Wyly of being corrupt, spending %u201Cdirty money%u201D to help finance Bush%u2019s presidential campaign. McCain not only filed a complaint against the Wylys for allegedly violating campaign finance law, he also lashed out at them publicly. In April, McCain reached out to the Wylys for support.

[king_quest]

Sen. John McCain (R) of Arizona, [who] told us that he knew that the war in Iraq war was %u201Cprobably going to be long and hard and tough,%u201D and that he was %u201Csorry%u201D for anybody who voted it thinking it would be %u201Csome kind of an easy task.%u201D

Sen. McCain on CNN on Sept. 24, 2002: %u201CI believe that the success will be fairly easy.%u201D

Sen. McCain on CNN on Sept. 29, 2002: %u201CWe%u2019re not going to have a bloodletting of trading American bodies for Iraqi bodies.%u201D

Sen. McCain on this network on Jan. 22, 2003: %u201CWe will win this conflict. We will win it easily.%u201D

What%u2019s that%u2019s called again? Flip-flopping? Senator, we keep all the tapes of these interviews. C%u2019mon!

[king_quest]

Then there%u2019s the McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform%u2019s assault on First Amendment free speech and his over-the-edginess on man-made global warming

[formrusmcsgt]

Such the typical smoke screen we so frequently see you hyphenated-Americans squirting out.

You cropped a paragraph. A single thought. I never ask for additional paragraphs and you know it. Just the three sentences within the single paragraph required to reveal the whole thought.

I''''m still waiting for my apology. But, seeing as how you are a Democrat, I won''''t count on it.

BTW: Sorry, but your attempts to stampede my emotions simply don''''t work, since I''''m not a fffffeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeelllllliiiiiinnnnnng
ggggssss founded Democrat.

Posted by Beastof70 at 10:20 AM : Jun 21, 2008

Listen crybaby. I could care less what your emotional state is.

I was parrying your contention that the Enron loophole was nothing more than a smokescreen.

I pasted that sentence in it''s entirety.

I don''t have to paste four paragraphs of yours to rebut one sentence.

[beastof70]

It''s been a gas folks, but I feel a big Democrap coming on. I likely need to exhaust a few of these OsamaObamas.

[king_quest]

Then, there%u2019s immigration. McCain has favored amnesty for illegals for years. (%u201DI think we can set up a program where amnesty is extended to a certain number of people,%u201D McCain said in 2003. %u201CAmnesty has to be an important part, because there are people who have lived in this country for 20, 30 or 40 years . . . and are not citizens.%u201D) But he now says he%u2019s never done so. (%u201DThe fact is that I%u2019ve never supported amnesty,%u201D he said this year.) Talk about getting taken for a ride on %u201CThe Straight Talk Express.%u201D

[beastof70]

I''''''''ll be waiting for my apology, hopefully some time prior to hell freezing over.

Posted by Beastof70 at 10:08 AM : Jun 21, 2008
I need not apologize for choosing to not paste 4 paraghrphs to address one point.
I cropped no sentences.
Your words, not mine.
People partially paste comments of mine all the time.
I don''''t cry about it.

Posted by formrusmcsgt at 10:11 AM : Jun 21, 2008
=======================

Such the typical smoke screen we so frequently see you hyphenated-Americans squirting out.

You cropped a paragraph. A single thought. I never ask for additional paragraphs and you know it. Just the three sentences within the single paragraph required to reveal the whole thought.

I''m still waiting for my apology. But, seeing as how you are a Democrat, I won''t count on it.

BTW: Sorry, but your attempts to stampede my emotions simply don''t work, since I''m not a fffffeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeelllllliiiiiinnnnnngggggssss founded Democrat.

[king_quest]

The same goes for waterboarding. McCain calls it %u201Ctorture%u201D and gets high and mighty when anyone says otherwise. Democrats and the media eat this up because, who has greater authority on torture than McCain? Actually, I think it%u2019s his POW experience that calls his judgment on this issue %u2014 an issue so deeply personal for him %u2014 into question. Whatever the case, I%u2019d like one candidate in the general election who believes waterboarding is legitimate when we%u2019ve captured a terrorist who knows the location of a ticking nuclear bomb. I think the lives of Americans are worth more than the temporary psychological distress of a terrorist, but that%u2019s just me.

[king_quest]

Let%u2019s start with the Arizona senator%u2019s vote on the Bush tax cuts. He voted against both the 2001 and 2003 cuts. Today he insists he was right to oppose them, because Congress would not cut spending at the same time. In the past, however, his reasons for opposing these tax cuts had a far different emphasis.

%u201CI cannot in good conscience support a tax cut in which so many of the benefits go to the most fortunate at the expense of middle-class Americans,%u201D he said in May 2001.

%u201CI want to see tax cuts, if they are necessary, go to working Americans, not the wealthiest,%u201D he said in April 2003.

%u201CI voted against the tax cuts because of the disproportionate amount that went to the wealthiest Americans,%u201D he said a year later.

HIS current reasons for opposing Bush%u2019s tax cuts don%u2019t square with his past reasons.

[formrusmcsgt]

Posted by Beastof70 at 10:14 AM : Jun 21, 2008

So your contention is that the Hillary supporters will never get over it?

If so, it doesn''t say much for them as a group, does it?