McCain - Palin

[black francis]

Whatever dude, you served your purpose in NY and now I am over you. And thanks for getting me involved in that mixtape group. The one I got fucking sucks.

[withahip]

Whatever dude, you served your purpose in NY and now I am over you. And thanks for getting me involved in that mixtape group. The one I got fucking sucks.

You can just step off mofo. All tose Bigfoot books you sent me. In the trash.

[black francis]

Don't worry about it. I deleted all those "songs" by your "band" that you emailed me.

You're going places buddy.

[withahip]

Yeah - keep on trucking with your weak-ass board!

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qq8Uc5BFogE&eurl[/youtube]

[black francis]

There's nothing weak about the General Lees III and IV



I mean other than a grown man taking pictures of them.

[Frank The Bunny]

There's nothing weak about the General Lees III and IV



I mean other than a grown man taking pictures of them.

They look a little banged up. Aren't you worried about messing up the artwork, what with all that grinding and ollies and whatnot?

[black francis]

Not really cause I'm so X-TREME.

[Dr Evil]

Taken from http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/09/ ... 4049.shtml

Palin: "But listening to him speak, it's easy to forget that this is a man who has authored two memoirs but not a single major law or reform - not even in the state senate."

I guess she was calling both Audacity of Hope and the other one (something about his father) "memoirs". If they are not both memoirs, then that is an error. But a lie? I don't think so. As for major pieces of legislation, I guess it depends on what you call major. Again, point of view and spin, but a lie? If these are lies, then every politician is lying all the time, including the your sainted one.

The point of the two memoirs/no accomplishments meme is that Obama is much more famous for being famous than he is for what he has done. All hat and no cattle, as the cowboys say. Again, you may disagree, but it is an arguable point of view. (Very much so IMO.)

Palin: "America needs more energy ... our opponent is against producing it."

No -- he plans to develop a lot more energy than John McCain does. It's just that a lot of it is renewable, not carbon-based. Moreover, Obama hasn't skipped the last eight votes on renewable energy.

Ha ha good one. He "plans" developing huge amounts of renewable energy resources that are not carbon based? What is he, a magician? Everyone "plans" to do that, but much of our energy comes from oil, and that's where it will come from for the near future. Refusing to develop our fossile fuel resources is a refusal to develop energy, plain and simple. You may disagree, but that does not make this a LIE.

As for the skipping votes crack, I'm not sure that's fair. Obama is well-known for vote skipping, and I'm sure you think it is just awful when someone points that out.

Palin: "The Democratic nominee for president supports plans to raise income taxes ... raise payroll taxes ... raise investment income taxes ... raise the death tax ... raise business taxes ... and increase the tax burden on the American people by hundreds of billions of dollars. My sister Heather and her husband have just built a service station that's now opened for business - like millions of others who run small businesses. How are they going to be any better off if taxes go up?"

Based on your Tax Policy Center FACT you posted below, this seems correct. At the very least you can't call this a LIE.

THE FACTS: The Tax Policy Center, a think tank run jointly by the Brookings Institution and the Urban Institute, concluded that Obama's plan would increase after-tax income for middle-income taxpayers by about 5 percent by 2012, or nearly 2,200 dollars annually. McCain's plan, which cuts taxes across all income levels, would raise after tax-income for middle-income taxpayers by 3 percent, the center concluded.

So, if it turns out you were wrong about these lies, does this make you a liar? Perhaps we should just say that you have a political point of view which you want to promote in the strongest possible terms while highlighting the weaknesses of opposing points of view in the least flattering way possible.

Obama must know about this; http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea ... y?id=51070
So whilst he is not a magician he knows people who are. Enough of this technology spread thoughout the desert could make America richer than Saudi Arabia and put the schoolgirl burning Saudi's out of business as well.

[black francis]

If that "sunshine to petrol" device actually works I think we can assume the inventors are good as dead.

[withahip]

Lake Erie sits atop natural gas reserves. Drilling on the US side is not allowed. So, Canadians drill, bringing much of the gas from the American side and sell it back to us.

[Kounelaki]

Thieving bastards!

[black francis]

[Kounelaki]

[withahip]

His record shows he has been liberal in many areas. Campaign Finance Reform comes to mind. I don't know about Obama because his voting record is so limited.

We must hate the other party!(?) Whatever the other party is hate!!! (?) Buy into the baby boomer mentality!!! (?) HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE!!!!!!(?) Listen to 1520 Gr 550 - but keep hating and being sarcastic to the other side!!! (?)

Throw the baby out with the bathwater!!!


whatever.

Talk radio impugns McCain's liberal record
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/200 ... al-record/



http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/02/2 ... 89141.html
"I will conduct a respectful debate," McCain told the crowd at Texas Instruments, per ABC News' Bret Hovell. "Now, it will be spirited because there are stark differences. I am a proud conservative, liberal Republica--- conservative Republican," he said, catching himself. "Hello?" he said as the crowd laughed. "Easy there."

In ABC's New Hampshire debate, McCain said: "Why shouldn't we be able to reimport drugs from Canada?" A conservative's answer is: That amounts to importing Canada's price controls, a large step toward a system in which some medicines would be inexpensive but many others -- new pain-relieving, life-extending pharmaceuticals -- would be unavailable. Setting drug prices by government fiat rather than market forces results in huge reductions of funding for research and development of new drugs.

When the Supreme Court upheld McCain-Feingold 5-4, Scalia and Thomas were in the minority. That was before Alito replaced Sandra Day O'Connor, who was in the majority. Two years later, McCain filed his own brief supporting federal suppression of a right-to-life group's issue advertisement in Wisconsin because it mentioned a candidate for federal office during the McCain-Feingold blackout period prior to an election. The court ruled 5-4 against McCain's position, with Alito in the majority.


http://www.slate.com/id/2139775/

Democrats alarmed by crossover affection for McCain usually begin by complaining about his down-the-line anti-abortion voting record. But McCain's smoke signals spell out something different—an unsuccessful attempt to back away from a mandatory position he no longer believes in, if he ever really did. In August 1999, McCain said, "I'd love to see a point where Roe v. Wade is irrelevant, and could be repealed because abortion is no longer necessary. But certainly in the short term, or even the long term, I would not support repeal of Roe v. Wade, which would then force women in America to [undergo] illegal and dangerous operations."



http://www.gunowners.org/mcdisguise.htm
First, regarding religion, McCain looms as no lover of Christians. Recall his comments about key religious leaders in 2000, calling them "agents of intolerance." And McCain's vitriolic vilification of Christians was not limited to a single occurrence, for he later said, "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." (Hardball, 3/1/00). More recently, however, McCain, positioning himself for 2008, has repackaged himself as pro-Christian, lauding key religious leaders and duping the devout. (Is this not as reptilian as Bill Clinton's waffling?)

Second, on the issue of gay marriage, in 2005 McCain opposed a federal gay-marriage ban (Los Angeles Times, 1/25/ and 3/8). Now, however, likely realizing that most Americans think otherwise, McCain says he supports a gay-marriage ban (Meet the Press, 4/2/06). Which is it? Given his penchant for progressive politics, we can only assume the former.

Then, regarding abortion, McCain most certainly is pro-choice. In the San Francisco Chronicle (8/20/99) McCain sided with the pro-abortion camp, suggesting that overturning Roe v. Wade would lead to illegal abortions. Realizing, however, that he could not inveigle the GOP nomination with such views, McCain more recently has resold himself as pro-life, even saying he would support the South Dakota ban on abortions. What are Americans to believe? He either is pro-choice or lacks any real conviction on the subject.

Furthermore, regarding campaign-finance reform, the McCain-Feingold Campaign Reform Act is perhaps one of the more left-wing acts of Congress in the past twenty years. As recently exposed by Brian C. Anderson, "The Plot to Shush Rush and O'Reilly" in City Journal, McCain-Feingold (which passed with overwhelming Democrat support) is a convenient contrivance to silence conservatives. As noted by a whole host of commentators (George Will, Jonathan Rauch, and even Justice Clarence Thomas), this act poses blatant restrictions on political speech. It especially affects AM Radio and political internet blogs -- the only two spheres of popular media where conservatives can truly compete. Critics remain divided why McCain supported a dictate so damaging to conservatives. Was it perhaps so that he could silence many on the Right whom he laconically loathes?

Last, but not least, McCain's liberal tendencies show in the immigration debate. McCain has proven to be farther Left on the immigration issue than even many Liberals. At the very basis of most conservative thought is the idea of law and order, which are essential for the continuity of society. Bypassing tradition and sanity, and slapping in the face those who have come here legally, McCain has sought to sweep aside law and order to engage in the unbecoming business of pandering to ethnicities. (Isn't this the dominion of Democrats?) McCain's radical views on immigration threaten numerous components of the wellbeing of the United States and, more generally, Western Civilization: national security, standards of living, and cultural homogeneity, to name a few. McCain has courted the cheap-labor lobby for some fast cash for 2008 and now attempts to convert the U.S. into a third-world country.

McCain's liberal laundry list goes on and on. Senator Lindsey Graham, another liberal in disguise, comments correctly that the present is a defining moment for the Republican Party, although his underlying analysis is wrong. The choice is between a party of McCain's vision, a party indistinguishable from the Democratic Party, or a party that at least maintains a modicum of conservatism. If McCain loses, hopefully he will depart for the Democratic Party (where he belongs); but if he wins, expect to see a mass exodus of conservative voters from the GOP, probably over to a third party.

[black francis]

Is there a cliff notes version you could post?