Good read on McBama...

[Larry Gude (Premo)]

Originally Posted by ImnoMensa

Anyone who would vote for Obama just to prove in some stupid azzed way that the USA is now politically correct enough to do so is a friggin fool.

...he grazes over that speed bump in the article and doesn't even rubberneck how asinine that sounds. Bothersome.

Good point.

[AndyMarquisLIVE (Premo)]

Originally Posted by Larry Gude

...you'd read that John McCain saved a puppy from getting run over you'd say he only did it so he could take it home and kill it in front little kids and then eat it raw. Then you'd say that we shouldn't worry; Barack Obama will swoop down and save the puppy from McCain's evil clutches, sock him in the nose and return the pup to it's grateful owners.

And the pup would lick Obama's face while McEvil heads back to the drawing board and plots to cancel Christmas or some other nefarious enterprise.

You called his number out.

Originally Posted by vraiblonde

He got you, Bruzilla. Any time someone posts something unflattering about Obama, you rush in to either A) defend him; or B) go off on some tirade about McCain.

[Larry Gude (Premo)]

Originally Posted by vraiblonde

He got you, Bruzilla. Any time someone posts something unflattering about Obama, you rush in to either A) defend him; or B) go off on some tirade about McCain.

:terroristfistbump:

Originally Posted by This_person

You agree with the poor assessment of Obama, but redefine "steadfastness" to "party allegience".

See, by NOT always doing the party line, he's demonstrating INDIVIDUAL thought, and a steadfastness towards it. His loyalty is to his constituency, not his party.

I'll just ask you the same question I ask all people who like to brag on McCain for being a maverick and demonstrating INDIVIDUAL thought: have you looked at when he does, or doesn't, display such thinking? Of course not. You really should take a look at that. On issues where individual thought are encouraged, McCain is 100% with Republicans. On issues of great importance to Republicans, where a party-line vote is called for, that's when McCain starts showing his INDIVIDUAL thinking. That's not being a maverick, or individual thinking, that's just resentment at being told what to do, and McCain has acknowledged he has a real problem with that.

If McCain really were a maverick/individual thinker, he would apply that concept to all the issues he considered, not just the critical ones where the Republican leadership insists everyone vote the same way.

Originally Posted by Larry Gude

...a gramatically correct sentence?

For the record; I do NOT support John McCain for potus and will not. Unless Condi is his veep. Or Ron Paul.

To the first... ah... no.

To the second, I hear what you're saying now, but I also hear you making excuses for McCain. I'm confident that by November you will be sufficiently brainwashed to pull the lever for McCain.

[MMDad]

Originally Posted by vraiblonde

He got you, Bruzilla. Any time someone posts something unflattering about Obama, you rush in to either A) defend him; or B) go off on some tirade about McCain.

He does not!

Originally Posted by Bruzilla

I'll just ask you the same question I ask all people who like to brag on McCain for being a maverick and demonstrating INDIVIDUAL thought: have you looked at when he does, or doesn't, display such thinking? Of course not. You really should take a look at that. On issues where individual thought are encouraged, McCain is 100% with Republicans. On issues of great importance to Republicans, where a party-line vote is called for, that's when McCain starts showing his INDIVIDUAL thinking. That's not being a maverick, or individual thinking, that's just resentment at being told what to do, and McCain has acknowledged he has a real problem with that.

If McCain really were a maverick/individual thinker, he would apply that concept to all the issues he considered, not just the critical ones where the Republican leadership insists everyone vote the same way.

Well maybe you have a point, Vrai.

[Pete (Premo)]

Originally Posted by Bruzilla

I'll just ask you the same question I ask all people who like to brag on McCain for being a maverick and demonstrating INDIVIDUAL thought: have you looked at when he does, or doesn't, display such thinking? Of course not. You really should take a look at that. On issues where individual thought are encouraged, McCain is 100% with Republicans. On issues of great importance to Republicans, where a party-line vote is called for, that's when McCain starts showing his INDIVIDUAL thinking. That's not being a maverick, or individual thinking, that's just resentment at being told what to do, and McCain has acknowledged he has a real problem with that.

If McCain really were a maverick/individual thinker, he would apply that concept to all the issues he considered, not just the critical ones where the Republican leadership insists everyone vote the same way.

You mean like when the GOP was threatening the "nuclear option" of changing the Senate rules to stop the filibustering of judicial nominees? When McCain broke ranks and did the gang of 14 that prevented a Senate rules change that would have totally bit the GOP in the ass now that the democrats have a majority AND got a bunch of judges appointed that had sat in limbo for 2+ years thanks to Reid and the minority blocking them?

And how exactly do you determine what votes require individual thought and which ones are OK to vote lock step? I know, the ones McCain votes contrary to the bulk of the GOP are "bad" and the ones he voted with the majority of the GOP are "bad".

Originally Posted by Pete

You mean like when the GOP was threatening the "nuclear option" of changing the Senate rules to stop the filibustering of judicial nominees? When McCain broke ranks and did the gang of 14 that prevented a Senate rules change that would have totally bit the GOP in the ass now that the democrats have a majority AND got a bunch of judges appointed that had sat in limbo for 2+ years thanks to Reid and the minority blocking them?

And how exactly do you determine what votes require individual thought and which ones are OK to vote lock step? I know, the ones McCain votes contrary to the bulk of the GOP are "bad" and the ones he voted with the majority of the GOP are "bad".

Excellent point! You think that McCain used excellent judgement in his forming of the Gang of 14, especially given that the Democrats now have a majority. Let's look at that analysis for a moment.

What was the initial purpose of the Gang of 14? It was to prevent Frist from using the nuclear option to get conservative judges their fair vote in the Senate. The effect of these fillibusters was that the minority party in the Senate was in fact determining who could be nominated to the courts, which is the President's job not their's, regardless of which party is in charge. Frist made the decision to use it, and McCain undercut his authority. Did he do the right thing? Well, what was the outcome on judges? Republicans got commitments that three nominees (Janice Rogers Brown, William Pryor, and Priscilla Owen} would get their votes, but the agreement also stated that there would be no consideration given to any judge but these three. There was never an agreement that would allow what was correct, which was all judges should get a hearing... just those three judges. So we traded the nuclear option for three judges and the legitimizing of the practice of denying nominees their votes and William Myers and Henry Saad never got their votes. As usual, the Dems got everything they wanted, we got next to nothing.

Also, the Gang of 14 agreement only lasted during the 109th Congress. McCain didn't bother to make his little gang the norm, or rules change that would eliminate the nuclear option for everyone. Nope... he negotiated an agreement where the Dems are free to do whatever they want now. And if they decide to use the nuclear option themselves if Republicans try to fillibuster, do you think a second Gang of 14 will be created? I doubt it. Once again, as with most deals McCain engineers, the Democrats get the best part of the deal and the Republicans get the poopy end of the stick.

Originally Posted by Pete

And how exactly do you determine what votes require individual thought and which ones are OK to vote lock step? I know, the ones McCain votes contrary to the bulk of the GOP are "bad" and the ones he voted with the majority of the GOP are "bad".

I don't get to determine those, the Republican leadership does. Maybe a good indicator is those issues where the Republican leadership would say "Party unity is essential to getting this bill passed" or "We need to get every Republican to vote for this"? Shouldn't be too hard for you to figure it out.

On the issues where McCain votes contrary to Republicans they do tend to be bad for Republicans.

[chernmax]

Originally Posted by vraiblonde

He got you, Bruzilla. Any time someone posts something unflattering about Obama, you rush in to either A) defend him; or B) go off on some tirade about McCain.

...................................