News Who do you plan to vote for: Obama or McCain?

[Bystander]

"Vote for?" Neither.

Vote against? Both.

To which am I most opposed? They're both running for dogcatcher, collateral duties being to take out the garbage, shovel the walks, make all the nasty, dirty little on-the-spot decisions about "things" (earthquakes, tsunamis, hurricanes, blizzards, floods, wars, illegal aliens, and other obnoxious minutia), wrestle congress over spending, maintain infrastructure, and lead assorted "sheep" to overgrazed meadows --- John does have a record for picking up after other peoples' messes at his own expense. A thin edge to JM.

 

[Gokul43201]

More references for Russ...

2. McCain on the Religious Right:

Neither party should be defined by pandering to the outer reaches of American politics and the agents of intolerance, whether they be Louis Farrakhan or Al Sharpton on the left, or Pat Robertson or Jerry Falwell on the right.

-- McCain Campaign speech at Virginia Beach, Feb 28, 2000

RUSSERT: Do you believe that Jerry Falwell is still an agent of intolerance?

MCCAIN: No, I don’t. I think that Jerry Falwell can explain to you his views on this program when you have him on.

-- McCain in Meet the Press (MSNBC), Apr 2, 2008

I must not and will not retract anything that I said in that speech at Virginia Beach. It was carefully crafted, it was carefully thought out.

-- McCain on Hardball (MSNBC), Mar 1, 2000

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0002/28/se.01.html
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12067487/page/4/
http://thinkprogress.org/2006/04/02/mccain-falwell/

 

[russ_watters]

Isn't it interesting here too, that they didn't quote him on his actual position?
It's really funny that you'd pick Oil Drilling to highlight Obama's flip-flopping (Incidentally, he hasn't flip-flopped in his opinion that offshore oil drilling is not a good idea. To my knowledge, he has only said that he will not vote against a bill that includes some limited drilling as part of a broader energy plan. He still doesn't think it's a good idea, but will make the compromise in order to break a partisan deadlock. The only reversal is in his decision to make a bipartisan compromise on this issue.)

That's a great hedge, Gokul, but it is just plain wrong. Here's what he said previously:

"When I'm president, I intend to keep in place the moratorium here in Florida and around the country that prevents oil companies from drilling off Florida's coasts..."

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/08/02/campaign.wrap/

No hedge, just no drilling (poor wording aside...).

You want references for all of them? At least half of them are common knowledge.

Okay, this will take a while, but I'll do them a little bit at a time...

I appreciate it. And yes, I agree that some are common knowledge, but some don't seem right -- exaggerated, perhaps.

 

[russ_watters]

Q3. Where does McCain stand on teaching Intelligent Design in schools?

<<For his 2000 campaign, he was against it, opposing GWB's stance. Now he is for it. Where will he be tomorrow? >>

I'd like more on this one, if you don't mind. Here's what I could find on the issue:

McCain believes in evolution, personally believes that :"intelligent design" "creationism" shouldn't be taught in SCIENCE class, but is willing to leave that decision up to the states, ultimately, and also, believes that students should be exposed to the theory elsewhere, presumably in religion or social studies class.

http://hotlineblog.nationaljournal.com/archives/2007/05/mccain_and_crea.html

The link includes quotes back as far as 1999 that appear consistent. A carefully crafted hedge, to be sure, but a consistent one.

It also appears to me that the mention of teaching it may be a little bit of a trick for the religious types because he seems to be saying that it should be taught for the purpose of debunking (a view that I share, though I think science class is where it needs to happen).

"Shhh, you shouldn't tell them," he said, mimicking those who would shield children from the fact that some people believe in intelligent design. The former prisoner of war said he also disagreed with Cold War-era efforts to prevent Marxist-Leninism from being taught in schools, saying it was better for Americans to understand their enemy. He noted that he didn't say that intelligent design needed to be taught in "science class," leaving unclear exactly what class he thought it should be taught in. He said he believed local school boards, not the federal government, should determine curricula. [2006]

http://www.nysun.com/new-york/mccain-does-manhattan-by-the-issues/36187/

----------------------------------------------------------

Q4. Where does McCain stand on the issue of the Confederate flag (and related race issues)?

<<During the 2000 primaries, he supported SC flying the Confederate flag, calling it a "symbol of heritage". A couple years later, he said that it "should be taken down". Over a similar time frame, he opposed a MLK holiday before he supported it. But on the issue of Affirmative Action (AA), he switched the other way. In 2000, he supported AA and rejected ballot measures to ban it. Today, he supports the Arizona ballot measure to ban AA. Where will he be tomorrow? >>

This one is relatively clear. What you quoted was a dodge of a question, not an answer. He didn't say one way or another if it should be removed in that quote. The reality is, his position even in 2000 was not supporting the Confederate flag.

In his 2000 presidential bid, Mr. McCain, of Arizona, seemed to straddle the issue, first calling the flag "a symbol of racism and slavery" but then releasing a statement saying he understood both sides.

"Some view it as a symbol of slavery; others view it as a symbol of heritage. Personally, I see the battle flag as a symbol of heritage," Mr. McCain said.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/jan/18/mccain-romney-hit-over-confederate-flag/

Note that he didn't say one way or another if it should be kept, he just stated the arguments of both sides about what it means. That enables people to hear what they want to hear even though he didn't say it.

I believe the flag should be removed from your Capitol, and I am encouraged that fair-minded people on both sides of the issue are working hard to define an honorable compromise," McCain said in his speech on conservative reform to the South Carolina Policy Council. [emphasis mine]

http://archives.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOLITICS/stories/04/19/mccain.sc/

 

[Gokul43201]

That's a great hedge, Gokul, but it is just plain wrong. Here's what he said previously: http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/08/02/campaign.wrap/

No hedge, just no drilling (poor wording aside...).

There's a difference between changing your opinions of right and wrong and changing your decision to work with something that you thing is wrong. For instance, it would be different if McCain said he thought Falwell was still an agent of intolerance but he now realizes that he must nevertheless work with Falwell for the greater good. But McCain has now changed his opinion of Falwell. That's the difference I was pointing out. Yes, Obama has changed his stance on drilling (he is more amenable to permitting it) but hardly any more than McCain.

Where does he say today that he supports lifting the moratorium? To my knowledge he has only said he will consider supporting a comprehensive bill that includes it. Support for a bill, does not imply support for every single provision within the bill, does it?

More references for people...

3. On Inteligent Design and Creationism:

I can't easily find references directly quoting McCain's opposition to teaching Creationism, from the 2000 campaign. My rough recollection is that Bush was pretty insistent on it being taught, while McCain wanted it left to local school boards to decide, though he was personally against the idea.

More recently:

Daily Star: Should intelligent design be taught in schools?

McCain: I think that there has to be all points of view presented. But they've got to be thoroughly presented. So to say that you can only teach one line of thinking I don't think is - or one belief on how people and the world was created - I think there's nothing wrong with teaching different schools of thought.

Daily Star: Does it belong in science?

McCain: There's enough scientists that believe it does. I'm not a scientist. This is something that I think all points of view should be presented.

-- McCain interview with Arizona Daily Star, Aug 28, 2005

McCain gave the keynote speech last year at an event co-hosted by the Discovery Institute, the primary propaganda machine for IDC. The event itself was about the US role in global affairs, and I expect that McCain's speech was too (I couldn't find a transcript).

http://www.azstarnet.com/sn/opinion/90521
www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/in...=271&program=Discovery+Institute&isEvent=true

 

[wildman]

I am voting for Obama for what probably amounts to a strange reason. Basically, the fiscally irresponsible "fake Democrats" have hijacked the Republican Party and they need to be punished. The only real hope for this country is to kick these characters out and hope that whoever replaces them (after Obama makes a mess of things) are different.

 

[isly ilwott]

I will be voting for someone other than Barack Hussein Obama. He is a socialist, elitist, narcissist, slick-talking politician with racist friends, a racist wife and a racist spiritual mentor. He will ruin whatever is left of our economy when he takes office. He will do what he can to destroy capitalism and freedom to do business for profit.

I may vote for Bob Barr just to make a statement for the Libertarian views...mainly SMALLER, less intrusive government. Barack Hussein Obama and his liberalism (communism disguised as socialism) will increase the already too strong control of government over the people by offering handouts to everyone on his list at the expense of what are now successful capital ventures...like the oil companies. He and Pelosi together with Harry Reid and the rest of the dumb masses running our congress and courts will literally have us all by the balls...and they will squeeze them 'til we pass out.

 

[WarPhalange]

I am voting for Obama for what probably amounts to a strange reason. Basically, the fiscally irresponsible "fake Democrats" have hijacked the Republican Party and they need to be punished. The only real hope for this country is to kick these characters out and hope that whoever replaces them (after Obama makes a mess of things) are different.

Hypothetically, if Obama does a job you approve of, what will you do then? Would you consider voting him in a 2nd term, or if the Republicans ran someone other than the lame bunch they ran this time, would you vote for him/her instead?

 

[WarPhalange]

I may vote for Bob Barr just to make a statement for the Libertarian views...

Don't you mean Robert Laurence Barr Jr.?

 

[OrbitalPower]

I may vote for Bob Barr just to make a statement for the Libertarian views...mainly SMALLER, less intrusive government. Barack Hussein Obama and his liberalism (communism disguised as socialism) will increase the already too strong control of government over the people by offering handouts to everyone on his list at the expense of what are now successful capital ventures...like the oil companies. He and Pelosi together with Harry Reid and the rest of the dumb masses running our congress and courts will literally have us all by the balls...and they will squeeze them 'til we pass out.

The oil companies get the biggest handouts out of nearly any industry; the US even spends more money fighting and protecting the oil in the ME than what it's worth.

Democrats actually favor across the board regulation in the market, where it is supposed to affect all corporations equally, or all corporations to the extent that they violate the law, rather than the corporate favortism of the Republicans. The Bush administration has also led to the largest expansion of the federalist budget in modern times.

I never understood this "Libertarian Party" (a party who would be considered tyrannical according to the original libertarians) claim that shifting power into the hands of private, unaccountable corporations is somehow "small government." It's like claiming old, colonial America was "smaller, better government."

It is clear that a "libertarian government" would be anti-human rights, anti-democracy, anti-freedom.

 

[Gokul43201]

Well, except the main point: like I said before, nowhere in any of that does it say he supported keeping the Confederate flag on the SC capital bldg and in that first link, McCain is quite clear about what he said and why: he dodged the question because he didn't want to lose SC.

That was the main point? Okay, McCain didn't use those exact words, but anyone hearing his response would have gotten the impression that he supported it. So okay, perhaps it's a cleverly worded dodge, intended to deceive. McCain describes his own answer as a compromise of his principles and an act of cowardice.

But more pertinent to the topic of knowing where McCain stands, can you tell me how McCain personally sees the Confederate flag: as a symbol of Heritage or as a symbol of Racism and Slavery? I can't. From your own quotes it seems he sees it as the first on one day and the second on another.

Also, I think I've answered your other question about McCain's support for teaching ID/Creationism, and teaching it as a science. Clearly, he has stated support for both proposals.

 

[russ_watters]

That was the main point?

Considering how you wrote the question, yeah:

Q4. Where does McCain stand on the issue of the Confederate flag (and related race issues)?

The confederate flag was your benchmark issue, being that it was the only issue in the question. If AA had been your benchmark issue, you would have put it in the question statement.

Okay, McCain didn't use those exact words, but anyone hearing his response would have gotten the impression that he supported it.

You heard what you wanted to hear. What you heard, he didn't say. Clearly, not "anyone" hearing the response would hear what you did. Heck, even one of your links from the original statement has a quote from some radom SC redneck who saw straight through it! C'mon Gokul, you're too smart for this kind of bs.

But more pertinent to the topic of knowing where McCain stands, can you tell me how McCain personally sees the Confederate flag: as a symbol of Heritage or as a symbol of Racism and Slavery? I can't.

Seriously? I don't see how it could be clearer: he does not support it and he was always in favor of taking it down. And that is because it is a symbol of the racist/slavery heritage of the south (see thought process in my next post).

Also, I think I've answered your other question about McCain's support for teaching ID/Creationism, and teaching it as a science. Clearly, he has stated support for both proposals.

Again, you were loose with your interpretation, reading things that he didn't say. Same goes for your interpretations of Obama: you interpret him as being consistent by ignoring when he changes his stance.

 

[russ_watters]

Maybe I understand the confederate flag thing because I see it almost exactly the same way as McCain does. Here's how it works:

1. The Confederate flag is a symbol of southern heritage. Heck, that's basically a trivial historical fact right there. It literally is that.

2. What is that heritage? Well, the flag is actually the Confederate battle flag, which makes it a symbol for the confederate side of the Civil War and what they stood for.

3. The Civil War was partly/largely about slavery, not to mention treason/dissolving the union.

4. Therefore, the Confederate flag is a symbol of the southern heritage of slavery and treason and shouldn't be flown on a state capital.

It really is simple.

 

[Gokul43201]

Considering how you wrote the question, yeah: The confederate flag was your benchmark issue, being that it was the only issue in the question. If AA had been your benchmark issue, you would have put it in the question statement.

I wasn't asking if the Confederate flag was the main point. I was asking about your specific wording about flying the flag on the SC capitol. Anyway, the Flag became the "main point" of my point#4 only because I decided to take down point#5,6 and consolidate everything into #4. (I may be getting the numbering wrong here)

You heard what you wanted to hear.

Clearly, it's what McCain wanted me to hear, and more importantly it's what McCain wanted SC to hear. Or he wouldn't call his choice of words an act of cowardice and a compromise of principles.

What you heard, he didn't say. Clearly, not "anyone" hearing the response would hear what you did.

I would think most people would have, barring some random rednecks.

Heck, even one of your links from the original statement has a quote from some radom SC redneck who saw straight through it! C'mon Gokul, you're too smart for this kind of bs.

What bs? McCain admits he was being deceptive, but you don't think so?

Seriously? I don't see how it could be clearer: he does not support it and he was always in favor of taking it down. And that is because it is a symbol of the racist/slavery heritage of the south (see thought process in my next post).

If you look at the way most Confedereate Flag proponents seem to deal with this, calling the flag a "symbol of heritage" implies that it is a thing of pride. There's a very clear dichotomy implicit in the wording: symbol of heritage = good; symbol of slavery = bad.

Again, you were loose with your interpretation, reading things that he didn't say.

So when McCain was being asked a question about ID, because he didn't use the words "ID" in his response, he could just as well be talking about real estate values or Britney's rehab program.

Same goes for your interpretations of Obama: you interpret him as being consistent by ignoring when he changes his stance.

Wait, this is interesting. You say that what's horrible about Obama is not that he flip-flopped on Oil drilling, but that he was positioning himself to play both sides. Now you admit that on ID, McCain was doing essentially the same thing, but that's a positive?

 

[Air]

I can't vote as I live in UK but if I had the chance to vote then it would go to Obama.

 

[Raven]

Here's another poll that asks the same question. http://www.votenow2008.blogspot.com" gives you the chance to vote for McCain or Obama according to your state of registration and calculates the Electoral Votes based on the responses. By the way ineligible voters such as Americans under the age of 18 or Non-American citizens can also place their vote to be heard in sections provided specifically for those groups.