RNC 2008: McCain Speech

[Zkribbler]

On the other hand, it'll be nice to see McCain get called on his false statements. For example:

"I will open markets. He will close them." What markets are closed that McCain will open? What markets has Obama called on to be closed?

"They claim to fight for you, but I'm the only one with a record of fighting for you." McCain votes against every increase in the minimum wage and voted against the new G.I Bill.

"We need all forms of power, oil, solar, wind, nuclear..."
McCain has repeated voted against alternative energy technologies. Governor Palin vetoed wind and clean coal projects.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Zkribbler
What markets has Obama called on to be closed?

I think you've forgotten his protectionist rhetoric of the primary.

[Patroklos]

and voted against the new G.I Bill.

Which is one of his most intelligent votes ever, and more impressive because of when he did so.

Simply voting me more money is not synonymous with voting in my interest.

[Imran Siddiqui]

voted against the new G.I Bill.

What a bunch of simplistic BS. He voted against the G.I. Bill that passed because he favored his own, which had more incentives for re-upping. Trying to portray him as voting against G.I. bills won't fly as his bill probably was the better one if you want to promote reenlistment.

[Zkribbler]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

voted against the new G.I Bill.

What a bunch of simplistic BS. He voted against the G.I. Bill that passed because he favored his own, which had more incentives for re-upping. Trying to portray him as voting against G.I. bills won't fly as his bill probably was the better one if you want to promote reenlistment.

The Inspector General's report indicated that the loss of people who opted to take the better benefits would be offset by increased enlistments by people attracted by those better benefits.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Zkribbler
The Inspector General's report indicated that the loss of people who opted to take the better benefits would be offset by increased enlistments by people attracted by those better benefits.

And how would that compare to McCain's bill? And is it better to have soldiers who just jump in to quickly jump out for benefits or soldiers who reenlist, so you can use their experience instead of training new recruits.

[Arrian]

McCain did have a point on that one.

I don't get you, though, Imran. I understand a vote for McCain in 2000. I do. I'd have cast one.

But now? Why? Is it that you really think that little of Obama? Are you just in favor of splitting power between Rep/Dem (Pres/Congress)? Do you want arch conservatives on the SCOTUS? Something else?

So you've got complete ignorance of housing policy amidst a nationalization.

Which probably won't hurt her, b/c most of the country doesn't know either and probably thinks exactly what she said...

Furthermore, one can spin what she said. For one "too big" is fine. That leaves "too expensive for the tax payers" ... which, at this very moment, is arguably true.

-Arrian

[Imran Siddiqui]

But now? Why? Is it that you really think that little of Obama? Are you just in favor of splitting power between Rep/Dem (Pres/Congress)?

A little of A and a little of B. I also think McCain would be FAR more bipartisan than Obama. I don't think Obama would necessarily reach out to the other side or put as many people from the other party in his cabinet as McCain would.

Obama is also spinning his tune as quickly as he can. Saying now the surge was successful and backing away from reversing the Bush tax cut (now saying he'd just let them expire when they come up for renewal if we are in a recession), so who knows what he really stands for?

[Aeson]

Being capable of modifying plans/analysis based on current situations is actually a good thing Imran. Don't you think?

[Arrian]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

But now? Why? Is it that you really think that little of Obama? Are you just in favor of splitting power between Rep/Dem (Pres/Congress)?

A little of A and a little of B. I also think McCain would be FAR more bipartisan than Obama. I don't think Obama would necessarily reach out to the other side or put as many people from the other party in his cabinet as McCain would.

Hmm. Possible, particularly given the current composition of Congress. But that can change. I take it, then, that you feel the GOP has been sufficiently punished by the 2006 mid-terms?

Obama is also spinning his tune as quickly as he can. Saying now the surge was successful and backing away from reversing the Bush tax cut (now saying he'd just let them expire when they come up for renewal if we are in a recession), so who knows what he really stands for?

There are some pretty good reasons to look at Iraq today and say the Surge was successful (just as there remain reasons for caution about declaring victory - putting this mildly...). That doesn't bother me (in fact, stubborn refusal to admit the Surge may have worked is worse).

The tax cut thing makes some sense to me, but there you have reason to wonder if his positions are too fluid. It doesn't bother me, b/c like I said, the position makes sense to me: he may think that taxes on people above 250k/year are low, but also recognize that now isn't the time to raise them. That, to me, says he's a prudent fellow and not an ideological fanatic.

-Arrian

[Ramo]

That leaves "too expensive for the tax payers" ... which, at this very moment, is arguably true.

They can try to spin that, but you can't really get that far since McCain (like Obama) is backing Paulson's plan. It's basically the standard issue conservative rhetoric that they apply to everything (excepting things related to Jesus and armed force) associated with the government. And not surprisingly, badly misinformed.

[rah]

Yes, they're both moving closer to the center because they're prudent and know where all the swing votes are coming from. By November you're basically going to have two people with the exact same views (like we're starting to see on energy policies) and the only difference is one is old and the other is black.

[Arrian]

The (sort of) exact same stated views, anyway. We can all draw our differing conclusions about what they "really mean" or what they would do in office.

Hell, Dubya ran in 2000 as a bit of an isolationist who was deeply against "nation building" and I actually think he may have meant it. Fat lot of good that did us.

-Arrian

[Zkribbler]

Originally posted by Arrian
The (sort of) exact same stated views, anyway. We can all draw our differing conclusions about what they "really mean" or what they would do in office.

Hell, Dubya ran in 2000 as a bit of an isolationist ...

Also as the "Environmental President," and the "Education President" and as a "uniter not a divider."

Okay, he gets points for that last one, 'cause he's united us into believing what an @hole he is.

[Arrian]

Also as the "Environmental President," and the "Education President"

I don't recall the environmental claim. That one is crazy, and I wouldn't have believed it for a second.

As for education, he probably thinks he is - witness No Child Left Behind. It's not like he ignored education. You can think it was bad policy, but it wasn't the product of neglect.

-Arrian