What about McCain?

Post #249,681 by bepatient 3/28/06 4:50:06 PM Reply	What about McCain? If you push something hard enough, it will fall over. _{Fudd's First Law of Opposition} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #249,686 by Another Scott 3/28/06 4:59:57 PM Reply	He pissed me off recently. [link\|http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/6/132113/2039\|Daily Kos]: Mon Mar 06, 2006 at 11:21:13 AM PDT John McCain, that self-styled "maverick" of Republican politics, continues to try to have it [link\|http://nationaljournal.com/mercurio.htm\|both ways], this time on the politics of abortion and specifically, the South Dakota ban. A spokesperson said Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., would have signed the South Dakota legislation, "but [he] would also take the appropriate steps under state law -- in whatever state -- to ensure that the exceptions of rape, incest or life of the mother were included." Well, Senator, the problem is that the South Dakota bill specifically ruled out exceptions for rape or incest, allowing only an exception for the ~~health~~ life of the mother, and by golly, the women of South Dakota were damned lucky to get that. I guess it's small comfort to know that their own lives rate just a little bit higher than a fertilized egg. McCain has tried in the past to distance himself from the Party of Dobson, but the allure of those hard-core, dedicated votes just keeps bringing him back. And McCain isn't the only one. [...] He's "Pro-Life" and that's well known. But he can't have it both ways. The SD bill doesn't have the exceptions he wants, so he should be against it. He's pandering to the Right too much. Cheers, Scott. (Who's reading [link\|http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Handmaid's_Tale\|The Handmaid's Tale] right now...)
Post #249,689 by tuberculosis 3/28/06 5:02:57 PM Reply	Hadn't heard that - more Hillary than Hillary [link\|http://www.blackbagops.net\|Black Bag Operations Log] [link\|http://www.objectiveclips.com\|Artificial Intelligence] [link\|http://www.badpage.info/seaside/html\|Scrutinizer]
Post #249,693 by bepatient 3/28/06 5:23:27 PM Reply	Sounds like his press spokesperson could also have easily misstated the position and it would be more appropriate to say he "would have" signed had those exemptions been included. But, coming up on election announcement time, he way well be pandering to the right in preparation for another run at the big house. If you push something hard enough, it will fall over. _{Fudd's First Law of Opposition} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #249,687 by tuberculosis 3/28/06 5:01:12 PM Reply	I have reservations He's been lying with the wrong dogs for awhile and while he has spoken up a couple times, he's been backing W a bit much for me to be completely comfortable with him. Frankly I'd like a Dem sweep, but I want different Dems than we have right now. [link\|http://www.blackbagops.net\|Black Bag Operations Log] [link\|http://www.objectiveclips.com\|Artificial Intelligence] [link\|http://www.badpage.info/seaside/html\|Scrutinizer]
Post #249,692 by inthane-chan 3/28/06 5:14:00 PM Reply	You go to elections with the party you've got...
Post #249,718 by tuberculosis 3/28/06 8:23:33 PM Reply	and catch a dose of the crap if you're not careful [link\|http://www.blackbagops.net\|Black Bag Operations Log] [link\|http://www.objectiveclips.com\|Artificial Intelligence] [link\|http://www.badpage.info/seaside/html\|Scrutinizer]
Post #249,711 by boxley 3/28/06 7:17:28 PM Reply	we would be in more wars than bush with him, no thanx Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 50 years. meep
Post #249,712 by drewk 3/28/06 7:22:18 PM Reply	Why do you say that? Not saying you're wrong, just that I never got that sense from him, or heard any reason to think so. === Purveyor of Doc Hope's [link\|http://DocHope.com\|fresh-baked dog biscuits and pet treats]. [link\|http://DocHope.com\|http://DocHope.com]
Post #249,714 by boxley 3/28/06 7:58:30 PM Reply	need to keep up with your reading :-) [link\|http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=8221\|http://www.antiwar.c...n/?articleid=8221] McCain's record is so consistent on this point that it's hard to see how someone could miss it. He is not only fervent in his support for the war and massive intervention in the Middle East, but he supported each and every one of Bill Clinton's wars, back when Republican members of Congress were coming off like peaceniks. While the Republican caucus was overtly hostile to President Clinton's war aims in Kosovo and Bosnia, and tried to cut off the funds for that little expedition, McCain cheered and called for "more boots on the ground" as the Clintonites bombed some of the oldest cities in Europe. Indeed, if you Google "more boots on the ground" along with McCain's name, the list of hits numbers somewhere around 700. thanx, bill Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 50 years. meep
Post #249,716 by drewk 3/28/06 8:08:17 PM Reply	Not how I recall his position on Iraq I remember hearing from him that we never should have gone in, but once we did we had an obligation to do it well. I've always gotten the feeling from him that he's against starting wars, but in favor of fighting those wars we are already in -- or can't avoid -- with all available force. === Purveyor of Doc Hope's [link\|http://DocHope.com\|fresh-baked dog biscuits and pet treats]. [link\|http://DocHope.com\|http://DocHope.com]

Welcome to IWETHEY!