U.S. Presidential Election 2008

I agree with Conquistador that unless you have the time to dig through the text of every piece of legislation to seek out every nuance and rider in the bill, just going by the titles of legislation and seeing whether a candidate voted "consistently" with his stated beliefs is extremely dubious.

Be it dubious or not ... your peragative.

But this is a Nationwide movement ... and one that continues today. So you can either say Veterans of wars past and present are just plain out wrong, or you can say, man... they may actually have something there , let me take notice.

Your choice. I happen to think they have enough hard facts to set the record straight regarding McCain and his claim in supporting Veterans Affairs.

Evidence that your claim is false. If I have time, I'll find some more examples, but you should be careful in the future about making claims about legislative votes that you don't understand simply because it appeals to your preconceived dislike of McCain. If I cited hundreds of votes by McCain in support of veterans benefits you would still be claiming he is anti-veteran because your fellow Obama supporters are passing around that claim.


After having been exposed making misrepresentations, I guess you just can't stop. I posted McCain's position, which isn't what you claim it is, last month.


If you cannot prove it, then your claim will be discounted. It is obvious from your little Google odyssey that there is a lot of misinformation about McCain's voting record that is béing passed around in the lefty blogosphere. Anything potentially bad about McCain is apparently automatically accepted as truth by you, so obviously others are also susceptible to the same disinformation that you have imbibed and passed on. Once again, a majority of veterans aren't drinking the James Jones Kool Aid and are supporting McCain.

So Conquistador, who are you gonna vote for?

Conquistador ... my statement, hasn't, by any stretch, been proven false by you (think magical apparitions). Like I say ... posting one or two bills that you claim (because this is your opinion we're talking about) he supported to show that his Congressional career is all about supporting Veterans ... would be really foolish. And honestly, prove nothing, because in the scheme of things ... if Veterans are raising an uproar about McCain (former POW), I listen.


Wow .. imagine that ... a lot of misinformation being dissiminated. Like some of the pettiness being discussed here? Similar no? It's a rare moment when this thread actually sticks to the issues.

The Veterans groups that find fault with McCain's policies have every right to air their concerns. Are you suggesting that they be censored?

Given that most veterans support McCain, you're standing on very thin ice with that argument.


Given what I have seen so far, I wouldn't hang my hat on it. Then again, you would almost certainly believe anything negative about McCain.


Don't know yet.

Some Veterans support him ... not all. Just so that we understand each other. Not that I care to come to any sort of agreement.

Once again, you need to be corrected as you have misrepresented/twisted my words. I have disagreed with your claim that "he dislikes veterans"- I did not say his career is "all about supporting veterans", although AFAIK, he has been suitably supportive.

Furthermore, I showed that your claim on the 2001 Wellstone motion/amendment was utterly false, and I showed an example of an amendment supportive of veterans benefits that McCain sponsored, which certainly contradicts your unuanced and broad claim about him, i.e., your claim that he does not like veterans.

Veteran opinion is not monolithic, and it seems you are only interested in their opinion if they are critical of JMC.


TWIST ALERT! Nope, I don't do censorship, so let's nip that false suggestion in the bud- don't know where you come up with these bizarre notions. Eurovol will be proud of your twisting skills, though.

As for KK's forlorn wish that only "some veterans support McCain":

I don't really want to go through this yet again, Conquistador, but if you can't take a bit of your own medicine, then shut the f*ck up. You labeled a similar comment from me to you as a PERSONAL ATTACK. I can understand the heat of the moment, but then don't turn into a petty ass about it when the tables are turned.

Sorry for the vigilante moderation, folks. As you were.

Well, Mr. Anti-American Horseshoe, your accusation is inaccurate, just like this one you have not been able to substantiate:


Here's a suggestion. take a US History class. Learn how to read for comprehension as well. If you are going to give me a hard time about alleged "twisting", horseshoe, make sure you do the same for your fellow Obama supporters if you think "twisting" is so bad. Is that too difficult? It is Obama supporters like yourself who started that campaign in the first place.

Please .. considering the amount of media censorship on many things ANTI-war/support I'm not blown away by your ability to google a poll. But wait a second ... this is just as important.

1st National Movement
Troops Deployed Abroad Support Obama 6:1
2nd National Movement

Considering it's widely reported that more military serving men and women are backing Obama's campaign ... I would say that shows quite a bit of support. And just for heck, I'll also throw in a vid for your viewing pleasure ... the movement against Veterans to McCain has been internet wide as well. Click Here So you can take your (I will discredit you til I die) attitude Conquistador and shove it. Face it, Veterans, Nationwide and abroad will decide if McCain is worthy of the vote based on his policies ... if he isn't, he won't get it.

It's a Gallup poll, KK.

Your links aren't impressive in the least, especially if you are extrapolating veteran support from alleged totals of campaign contributions of servicemembers serving in combat zones. CSR, AFL-CIO, all supporters of Obama. I'll take the Gallup Poll as a better indicator of veteran support, thank you, since it surveys veterans.

You'll disagree with anyone so long as you feel you've been proven right. The issue is Veterans making public, McCain's Congressional shortcomings. You've surpassed that by about ten miles and have still missed it. I see that they have enough evidence to prove that McCain has NOT shown enough of a commitment to Vets.

If a Veteran feels 'suitably supportive' isn't doing enough to show a genuine concern about their conditions home and abroad ... then McCain has failed to show that he will support Veterans causes against all odds. And has, in effect, turned Veterans groups against his campaign. This isn't based on whether you want to believe it or not.
It's a fact.

no, i'm getting on your back about making little snide remarks about others, when I once did the same to you (not long ago, searched for it, but must have been moderated since then), and you started crying personal attack. You should try to play fair. You should stop pointing out other people's hypocrisies (as you like to do) if you can't/won't acknowledge your own. You yourself told me yesterday "Der im Glashaus sitzt, soll nicht mit Steinen werfen".

anyway, not like you'd ever put yourself forth as anything other than bulletproof, so let's move on. I was criticising your debating tactics, not exactly you as a person. I have no idea who you are. You're just a long string of text to me.

God this is petty.

Calm down, KK. Obama is getting 34% in that Gallup Poll, and these are probably the same people you are referring to. When I have the chance, I'll see which veterans' groups support McCain- but you will probably claim it's all an illusion.

Horseshoe, until you start criticizing others, especially Obama supporters, I don't want to hear from you. I showed previously that you didn't know what you were talking about on this topic and many others, so you deal with it on your own.

Conqu ... I just got myself another glass of tea and I'm working on my romance novel in another window. I'm real mellow today... yesterday... well that's another story.

That's good, KK, it's nothing personal. Might want to send some tea to that Canadian dude.

So then ... what have you heard about the Veeps?? Biden rejects the claim he's the one for Obama. Virginia's governor (forgot the name) is another being mentioned for Obama. For McCain ... some young dude that's making waves on Capital Hill (who knows) I read in passing ... McCain's camp wanted his personal stuff...

This is getting beyond ridiculous! "He seems like a very modest person." Holy bejesus that's reading into things, considering you know jack squat about this guy. Maybe he's an arms dealer, or in a militia, or, just maybe, he isn't even related.

This now has top billing for the stupidest point being discussed. I'm taking part because it's like a train wreck in which I can play safely.

Look, the picture was hot, for sure, but don't let Alf sneak onto those pages.

That's nice Conqu, though I have no idea why you appear to be so happy. If you're sole purpose was to use a poll to determine the growing attitudes of discontentment from Veterans past and present, and the state of Veterans Affairs (given Walter Reed and other failures of the GOP to improve the conditions of Veterans), then sorry to say, you've fallen short.

Respectfully, all the opinion poll shows is that
McCain may have an overall advantage over Obama,


.. and nothing more. So no...you haven't won.

I have that impression burned into my brain ... how could I not??? LOL

"This week, Barack Obama's challenge is to select a running mate who's young, hip, and whose accomplishments in life don't overshadow Obama's. Allow me to suggest Kevin Federline.

The only thing we can be sure of is that Obama will choose someone who is the polar opposite of all his advisers until now. In other words, it will be a very, very white male who was probably proud of his country even before being chosen as Obama's running mate."

The sole purpose of the poll is to determine the amount of support that the candidates have among veterans. That you focus solely on "veteran discontentment" as if no other feelings or opinions are possible leads you to assumptions about the current preferences of veterans in the presidential election, which is probably why you seem to be in denial about the Gallup poll results. You want everyone to see things as you do, but veterans have many issues to consider, BTW, besides "veterans' issues"

It's convenient to blame everything on Republicans, but it's a bit more complex than that. I'm sorry you cannot see that. Not everyone who works for the VA or DOD is a Republican, BTW.


You're funny with the "you haven't won" because you finally realize what I have been saying about the veteran vote which is simply that McCain currently has an advantage with this voting demographic. I meant nothing more with it. As much as Obama supporters like you turn me off from Barry O, I am not going to let your Swift-Boating of McCain go unchallenged, nor will I let my disgust with your Swift-Boating of McCain make my decisions for me.

If that was your purpose then you missed the entire point of the exchange, not unlike every other exchange. I hardly discount the Gallop results...but you fail to put it in perspective because you are so gun-ho about proving you're right. So what do you do...foolishly google a Gallup poll because the title is so attractive 'Veterans Solidly Behind McCain', without reading what you actually posted.

Clearly Gallop is informing the public (from their own assessments) that more serving men and women consider themselves Republican in relation to the General Public that is more Democratic leaning. So obviously the results of their polling was meant to show the differences in political affiliation and the extent thereof it may come into play during the election. You have misrepresented the information ... because you also overlooked this one statement in your eagerness.
Obama leads McCain 46% to 43% among all registered voters during this time. And that is just one point Gallop makes sure to alert the readers to.


Instead of trying to get into my head and tell me what I'm thinking, how about you just sit back and accept that your perception isn't always accurate. That McCain is GOP and most Militiary personnel (according to Gallop) lean Republican, it's a no brainer. But to suggest (as you are doing) that McCain has the support of all Veterans is ludacris. As I've just shown you, he does not.

Now that that's cleared up, if you want to talk about swift-boating ... then I'm more than happy to discuss Jerome Corsi.

No, as usual, you either missed or deliberately ignored the point. Here is what you claimed:

I posted the Gallup poll to give us a general quantification of veteran support for McCain and Obama. Naturally you didn't like it because it showed your statement wasn't accurate. "Some" indicates a minority, whereas the Gallup Poll suggests it is actually a majority. One also must consider your use of the word "some" within context of your other posts on the topic, which would indicate that you thought (or hoped it would be) minority support.

You did in fact try to discount the Gallup Poll results:


No, that comment in the Gallup commentary was about analyzing the greater support by veterans for McCain, which is much greater than that of the general population. I posted the results of the poll to quantify veteran support for McCain, which you seemed to minimize. There was no need to point out party leanings if the issue in question is the amount of support for McCain, and indeed within the context of veteran presidential preferences, you have not raised it until now, when you wanted to discount the poll result. BTW, do not get confused between veterans (people no longer serving in the military) and those currently on active duty.


Even when it is conclusively proven you are wrong on the facts, you try to pretend it's just a matter of opinion. I challenge you to prove your claim that I ever said (or even suggested) "McCain has the support of all veterans". You won't be able to, because I obviously never said such a thing. It is your claims that I have disproven. Note also that I specifically posted earlier that veterans opinions are not monolithic. Given that, it's obvious I would never make the claim/suggestion you have falsely attributed to me.

BTW, Ludacris is a rapper.


Has it perhaps occurred to you that the AFL-CIO (a labor union that supports Democrats) opposes McCain for other reasons?

I myself would like to see the next President be fair to veterans without going out of their way to favor them. Certainly they need decent health care, including some of the specialized care that will be required after Iraq. Certainly they should continue to get whatever benefits they have been contractually promised when they signed up.

But I have seen some proposals being floated in Congress (can't be arsed, but it's probably the House) that seem to go a little overboard to me. Extending educational benefits to veterans' families that had previously been reserved for the veterans themselves, for example.

Spare me, I use Gallop myself at times, so obviously I respect the method by which you wanted to prove your point. But in context on the issue I orginally addressed, Gallop doesn't even attempt to take issues of Veterans opposed to McCain to task.


Since you used Gallop pollling to prove the overwhemling support McCain has with Vets, you should have known that Gallop would base it's anaylsis on party affiliation ONLY.


You've obviously interpeted the information wrong, and so off kliter to what I was orginally addressing that it's almost become funny because you just fail to see you missed the point. The quote comes from The Effect of Being a Veteran on the Vote.

Ultimately, you have not disproven my orginal statement, (which is what this all about now isn't it?) you've just informed the world what we already know. Serving men and women lean more GOP than Democrates in comparision to the overall General Public.

Now show me where Gallop has addressed the specific issues of Veterans that do not support McCain based on his Congressional policies. "Has it perhaps occurred to you that the AFL-CIO (a labor union that supports Democrats) opposes McCain for other reasons?" If it's based on his Congressional record... then I can certainly understand why.

Please, Flying Spaghetti Monster, please let someone pick their running mate soon.

LOL .. No worries cinzia. I have a chapter to finish and am definitely ready for a change of course...

Tell me, kitty kat, is there a swashbuckling conquistador in this romance novel you're writing? The guy you love to hate, but are irresistibly drawn to?

That was not the purpose of the poll I cited, and in fact I posted the result in response to your claim that "some veterans support McCain". I find it rather ironic that you want a poll when you already think you have your answer on this.


You want your cake and to eat it too- you claim there are all these veterans opposed to McCain. Then, when a presidential preference poll doesn't agree with you, you claim it's because of party affiliation. Note that McCain did better among Democrats who are veterans than those who are not veterans.

Given the following, it would be necessary to sample more Republicans than Democrats because to do otherwise would have produced a sample skewed towards a Democrat:


In the general polls, more Democrats are sampled than Republicans to keep those polls from getting skewed.


Keep dreaming. Someday your dreams may come true- in Wonderland.


Since you change your story so much, exactly which "original statement" are you claiming wasn't disproven?


Gallup isn't an arm of the Obama campaign. Don't expect them to be one. I suggest if you want such a poll you can ask the Obama campaign to have their pollsters take one. I think something like that would be called a "push poll". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Push_polling


That would be the same Congressional record Democrats distort and the same one you don't even analyze on your own. Ho-hum. Labor unions are a Democratic special interest group. Punkt.

This article gives a very good reason why McCain may have voted the way he did on some budgetary bills or amendments:


Seems very wrong for Democrats to demagogue McCain for trying to reform the Congressional budget appropriation process. That's cleaner government he is promoting, BTW. Given that support for VA programs is bipartisan, they will get funded- McCain just wants to do it without wasting taxpayers' money on these pork projects.

LOL
Not quite ... my background is during the Victorian era.
The Passion is intense, but it's the mystery of her, that keeps him coming back for more.
(not my photo, just an example)

I don't have all the answers, and never claimed to. What I did tell you was that McCain's congressional record is causing Veterans to doubt his genuine commitment, or lack thereof, to Veteran Affairs. I told you it does not appear that McCain likes kids or Vets, also according to the record. I told you not all Veterans are supporting McCain and I also let you know that I believe these groups have enough evidence, based on his record, to prove their case against him. Agree to disagree, but I give these guys/gals credit for having the balls to say, 'You know what, this man, this POW, this so-called war hero, just isn't a friend to Vets'.

Moving On To The Orginal Point lost in the jipper japper. A Transcript of the exchange here.
McCain: “I don’t know what bill you’re referring to…and I’ll be glad to have you refer to it. The reason why I have a perfect voting record from organizations like Veterans of Foreign Wars and American Legion and all the other veterans’ service organizations is because I support them.�

Audience Member: “You do not have a perfect voting record with [Disabled American Veterans] and VFW. That’s where these votes are recorded. The votes were for proposals by your colleagues in the Senate to increase health-care funding for the [Veterans Administration] in 2003, 2004, 2005 and 2006, for troops returning from Iraq and Afghanistan. You voted against those proposals. I can give the numbers of those Senate votes right now.�

Before The Sudden Withdrawal Timetable from Iraq Now From the WH

Remember When McCain Was Against A Withdrawl

In His Own Words - A Veteran


Not To Mention Homeless Vets

Hopefully there will be some fresh news so we can all move on.

Ha! Right.

We could argue about how many houses McCain has. Or maybe about which convict helped BHO buy his house.

McCain has received vet awards, however the DAV rates him poorly. Sounds like DAV is Dem heavy, pushing for large increases in benefits, not just increases like this.






BTW, FactCheck.org seems fairly impartial. They usually present both sides of a story and they don't seem to have a bias either way AFAIK.

As we have already seen, it seems that veterans who are Democrats are the veterans pushing this slander of McCain. I showed you an example of Obama voting with McCain on one vote that you complained about, and another example of Obama and Hillary voting (for whatever reason, and I am sure they had some valid one) against a bill that would have provided $600 million in health care spending for children. Are you going to accuse your hero Saint Barack (who couldn't be bothered to visit injured troops in Germany) of being anti-veteran/anti-military and anti-child? If not, your claims about McCain (by your own standards) are hypocritical.

I'm not going to give people credit for lying about McCain's votes and/or misrepresenting them. Nor do you get credit for not understanding the ins and outs of the federal budgetary process and the effect of things like the CBA, PAYG, and pork barrel addition to appropriations bills.


The Gallup Poll suggests most veterans support McCain.
You believe there is enough evidence, but as I showed you earlier, you don't understand the voting processes in the Senate, thus it stands to reason other Obama supporters don't bother to either. Also, you didn't do your own research, you simply copied something that is getting passed around by other Obama supporters, which is one reason you got caught making a false claim about McCain's voting.

"Having balls to say something", as yopu put it, doesn't mean you are telling the truth. I caught you making a completely false claim about a McCain vote and you couldn't even bother to admit you were wrong. When you actually analyze the votes within context and in the aggregate, you see there is no evidence for the absurd claims being made about McCain's voting on veterans issues. As a matter of fact, I am not aware of any person in the US Congress that does not support veterans and those on active duty.


I don't know why you and other Obama supporters continue to make the above false and/or misleading claims, but it is disgraceful. As long as you and others continue to make these claims and stand by them in spite of evidence you are wrong and/or misinformed, you will continue to be corrected. That goes for other issues as well.

Thanks for the Fact Check lnk, gatzke. From this link is an example of the AFL-CIO slander of McCain:

I have no point, just an observation.

Let's not take this so seriously, bohemka, if you can't have fun at the expense of a presidential candidate and his brother you're taking life too seriously.

Of course it's ridiculous to go on about whether he's supporting his half-brother, I'm sure he has offered help, and ons can't llok familial relationships when assessing a person's character. That's not fair.

So, onto VP checks. Would a Condoleeza Rice, or Colin Powell selection for McCain pull a portion of the Black and/or woman (the I'm voting because he's black/she's a woman crowd) vote from Obama? Not looking deeper into their qualifications or any baggage they would bring.

There are three problems I see with either Rice or Powell as McCain's VP candidate (although I have the utmost respect for both of them):
-Neither has ever been an elected official (no telling how they would campaign)
-Putting either of Bush's two Secretaries of State on the ticket would give the Democrats more ammo to continue with the rubbish refrain that McCain would be a third Bush term. Being tied to Bush is the worst possible thing for McCain, and although anyone who has followed his Senate career would know better, as we have recently seen on this board, Obama supporters don't care for the truth
-Putting either on the ticket to win more African-American votes would be of the barest marginal help, and I doubt Rice would bring in many female voters who would not otherwise vote for McCain (keep in mind that Obama may have picked a woman for his VP)

Powell could well have been a formidable candidate had he run for President in 1996. That reminds me- he's only eight months younger than McCain, which is another reason not to put him on the ticket.

Good point about Powell's age.

I'm just hoping that whomever each of them picks I'll finally be able to say " That's the team that's going to solve all my problems and finally make my life better!"

Unlike the current bunch who have completely fucked up my life and should will be made to atone for it.

Thats great then, they can change each other's adult diapers..

Maybe they could flip the script on the 'bucket list' and do cool things for everyone else.

Today on the BBC news site: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7575808.stm


Does this not say something about a person's character too? It's pretty arrogant to assume you know the answer, but as the author of this article wrote about Obama's response:


I feel McCain's tugging at the sensibilities of the religious folk. Obama's giving in my view a very fair and reasonable answer.

There's no room for 'fair and reasonable' in politics. It's 'fair and balanced,' and you have to be able to write it on the back of a business card. Get it straight.

Now this thread is making more sense to me. You're just following in the footsteps of your politicians:

bicker bicker bicker over bullshat


WTF does a person's personal property have to do with an election? What the hell is the point of attacking a person because their alleged housedeal was brokered by an ex-con? is an ex-con not allowed to live a semi-normal life after paying for his crime? did this ex-con kill someone in the deal? if not, then shut the fug up. dude's probably just trying to make an honest living on the outside.

likewise, WTF does it matter if McCain has 7 houses? He's a rich old man and is "free" (remember that word, freedom? patriot act excluded, naturally) to buy whatever the feck he wants to. "Man, I just can't trust a man with 7 houses. I'm gonna vote Obama." Is that the point of that?

Why do election campaigns always veer WAY off course in the US? Stick to the issues. i.e. the HOW. as in, HOW do I propose to achieve my goals? Not this negative campaigning crap, which is not helpful, and mirrors this thread. Generally pointless bickering that gets to the point where you don't even know what you're bickering about. Just mud-flinging for the sake of it, because neither side wants to try to meet in the middle and accomplish something.

Obama has tried so hard to steer clear of that, but people ultimately respond to that kind of crap, so he's now begun with the negative campaigning, which is a bit sad. He loses a few points for that in my book, but at the same time, if the american people wouldn't respond to such campaigning, he wouldn't do it. So, do you fault him or the electorate? Why do you never hear in surveys that people are turned off by certain candidates because of their negative campaigning style?

Negative attacks, or using that tactic also shows the character of a candidate, no?

Maybe we should look to our neighbors to the north and have campaign ads attacking other politician's facial deformities.

Negative campaigning is a political problem, not an American one. I do wish it would backfire for American conservatives like it backfired for the Cunucks though.

Yep. Keep it nice, people. Interesting how the Canucks of that time had an immediate backlash and wouldn't stand for that type of campaigning.

Is there a trend occurring here? Low-blows from the underdogs?

Interesting article. Funny seeing the name Allan Gregg. I've partied in his house and used to drink with his son.

I don't know if this has been posted, but as there seems to be a lot of discussion on the military and veterans some of you may find the links interesting, they are interviews by the Stars and Stripes Military rag newspaper with both contenders:

Interview with McCain
Interview with Obama

Arrogance, or decisive? No one can really answer that question and be correct. It's a question of what one believes and McCains direct answer shows that he understands and can explain his belief without question. Obama comes across as unsure of what he believes, that seems at times to be a recurring theme among Democratic candidates. He's trying to be everything to everyone and won't make a silid stand. This evidenced by his statement about supporting abortion without being pro-abortion? Does that go along with proud vs really proud? or smoking but not inhaling?

By the way, life begins at birth, not conception.

life begins in the 54th trimester, you should get time to decide if you want to keep it...