Thread: Can we all find Unity going after McCain?

Originally Posted by Bowman

Originally Posted by 1_paint

Gingrich people called again tonight looking for money for the party. The man sounded very down but not surprised to be told again "not a dime". They are touting McCain tonight, the last time it was Huckabee. I explained one more time that as long as the candidates they back are no different than Democrats, not a dime. My money is limited and I'm sending it to candidates I believe in, not a failed party. 5 or 10 bucks may make no difference or it may make all the difference.

You can donate $1 and they will spend about 20 times that amount with mailings and calls trying to get more out of you. Plus you can send the postage paid mailers back telling them how much they suck.

I like Bowman's approach (I always send back their solicitations in their own pre-paid postage envelopes - and enjoy every second of it)

Just a suggestion - get all our 'ducks in a row' before digging in seriously in the near future. We should compile our complete 'garbage list' (talking points) to use against him and the campaign.

Ex:

Lettuce-picking comment,
Selection of Juan H for 'Hispanic Outreach' (or whatever the spot is called),
Past Amnesty comments/bill sponsorship/etc.,
His Mom's Disapproving comments,
NumbersUSA Grade,
any and everything else...

...Just IMHO.

Absolutely !!!! Here is just one of many tidbits:

As you've seen in plenty of Youtube videos, John McCain made an idiot out of himself during the debate Thursday night when asked about President Bush's working group on the markets by Dr. Paul. He had no idea what Paul was talking about and his answer was rambling and reminded people of the Ms. South Carolina contestant who couldn't answer a question about students in America not being able to find Iraq on a map.

However, one point he was able to make clearly in all that mess was that there are two critical economic advisors to his campaign whom he would involve in these economic decisions - Warren Rudman and Phil Gramm.

Do yourself a favor and look both of these gentlemen up on Wikipedia and see just how insane it is for McCain to cite them as who he wants economic advice from.

Phil Gramm

Warren Rudman

So let me get this straight Mr. McCain - your two advisors either have been Democrats (Gramm) or played a key role in getting David Souter appointed to the Supreme Court (Rudman) where Souter proceeded to be the deciding vote in upholding Roe v. Wade. Not exactly staunch conservatives.

In the case of Gramm, he took in over $1,000,000 in campaign contributions from the Securities and Investment industry while he was chairman of the U.S. Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs. His wife was a director at ENRON and ENRON was a major contributor to his campaigns. Yeah that doesn't sound like a conflict of interest or anything.

Meanwhile, Rudman sits on the board of directors for Raytheon who is one of the largest military contractors in the world and also was on the board of directors of Collins & Aikman which filed for bankruptcy while he was on the board. Yes, let's listen to his economic views and policies. I wonder if he would advocate for more war?

Folks, McCain doesn't understand the economy (acknowledged by his own quotes in the Wall Street Journal that he then apparently forgot during the debate) so these are the guys he is going to turn to.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/01/25/ ... index.html


McCain's tax evasion

McCain spoke as though he had always supported Bush's tax cuts:

McCain: I think it's very important that we make the Bush tax cuts permanent. I voted to make them permanent twice already. If people and businesses and families in America are now planning their 2010 budget, there's a great deal of uncertainty. And if we don't make the tax cuts permanent, then they will experience what amounts to a tax increase.

It is true that McCain voted in 2006 to make the Bush tax cuts permanent. But he was against the cuts before he was for them, and his statements in the debate elide that fact. McCain voted against both sets of Bush tax cuts, in 2001 and in 2003. And on NBC's "Meet the Press" in 2004, McCain stated that he did not support extending all the cuts, though he did go on to say that he would make the so-called "middle class" tax cuts permanent:

McCain in 2004: I would have -- I voted against the tax cuts because of the disproportionate amount that went to the wealthiest Americans. I would clearly support not extending those tax cuts in order to help address the deficit. But the middle-income tax credits, the families, the child tax credits, the marriage tax credits, all of those I would keep.

McCain is entitled to change his mind. And in fact, his opinions are not necessarily contradictory; he may believe that the tax cuts he opposed should now be made permanent so that taxpayers know what to expect (although in '04 he only wanted middle-class taxpayers to have that assurance, and in the '05 Wall Street Journal interview cited above, he also said some of the Bush tax cuts were "too tilted to the wealthy"). But his statements last night could lead voters to believe that he has always supported the cuts, and that's simply not true.


Just like his moma said... hold your nose before you vote for him

Count me in, I'll do anything and I'm open to suggestions. McCain would be the WORST thing that could happen to us.
I have also told the Republican Party to go to blazes when they call. In fact, it makes me feel good after they call. I've probably sent 25 of their postage paid envelopes back to them with nasty comments.

Originally Posted by 31scout

Count me in, I'll do anything and I'm open to suggestions. McCain would be the WORST thing that could happen to us.
I have also told the Republican Party to go to blazes when they call. In fact, it makes me feel good after they call. I've probably sent 25 of their postage paid envelopes back to them with nasty comments.

Getting McCain for President would be like ordering a great steak and getting back a maggot sandwich, and hearing: this is what your getting.

Well we are doing everything we can here to GOTV for Ron Paul...so I can not commit to politikin for Mitt Romney (I'm in Florida). But I do NOT want McPain to win. I don't think he will win here...seems like I saw that Romney was ahead. Did ya'll see that the police put Ron Paul supporters in a CAGE and called it a "free speech zone"??? That was in Boca Raton at that college campus the other night.. Unbelievable. The Ron Paul supporters near about got arrested.

Roger Hedgecock, on his nat'l show this morning, was saying McCain was born in the Panama Canal zone and therefore wondered if he was really ok to run for President? Wasn't able to hear the entire show don't know if that question was resolved. Roger is not for McCain either. Praised his military record but not his voting record.

Originally Posted by jean

Roger Hedgecock, on his nat'l show this morning, was saying McCain was born in the Panama Canal zone and therefore wondered if he was really ok to run for President? Wasn't able to hear the entire show don't know if that question was resolved. Roger is not for McCain either. Praised his military record but not his voting record.

I seem to remember seeing this hashed out on other forums , Seems his parents were citizens so that would make him one also

Originally Posted by jean

Roger Hedgecock, on his nat'l show this morning, was saying McCain was born in the Panama Canal zone and therefore wondered if he was really ok to run for President? Wasn't able to hear the entire show don't know if that question was resolved. Roger is not for McCain either. Praised his military record but not his voting record.

I think his dad was an Admiral, that's all I'll say about that, so he was probably born within the jurisdiction of a base (why I support Ron Paul) therefore he's supposedly ok not that I agree.

As far as unity in pointing out the flaws and spreading the word about the flaws of McCain, I'm all for it. If we're referring to unity as to back only one candidate against McCain I think that is impossible. There are Christians here who would not vote for Romney for various reasons and not just beause of his religion. I would vote for Romney if he had the Constitutional credibility Ron Paul has, his religion is not an issue with me.

I caught some of Michael Savage a couple of times last week, he has a huge audience, and he clearly said more than a few times he does not support or endorse a particular candidate some here have claimed. I think he said he doesn't like any of them and is hoping for an Independent.