obama/change

DOGS THAT BARK

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 13, 1999
19,515
211
63
Bowling Green Ky
yep 1st since watergate--and black eye on Mccain--to think he really put any value in Obama's word-about puts him in same boat as Obama on judge of character issues--Hope he comes out tomorrow with "He's not the man I knew" :mj07:

Appears A.P. had better take on Obama per their high-lighted acknowledgement ;)

Obama bypasses public money ? 1st since Watergate

By JIM KUHNHENN, Associated Press Writer
5 minutes ago



WASHINGTON - Barack Obama is abandoning public financing for his presidential campaign, reversing his earlier stance in bold certainty he can raise millions more on his own as the first major-party candidate to bypass the tax-checkoff system that was hurried into place after the Watergate scandal.


Obama has shattered fundraising records during the primary season, and he promptly showed off his financial muscle Thursday with his first commercial of the general election campaign. The ad, a 60-second biographical spot, will begin airing Friday in 18 states, including historically Republican strongholds.

Though it opens him to charges of hypocrisy, Obama's fundraising decision was hardly a surprise, given his record in raising money from private sources. Some $85 million in public money is available to each major party nominee during the fall campaign if they agree to forgo other contributions.

McCain told reporters in Minnesota on Thursday, "We will take public financing."

As for his opponent, he said Obama "said he would stick to his word. He didn't."

Obama has proven himself to be a prodigious fundraiser who could easily raise more than the public fund supplies. And while he and his advisers know McCain and other Republicans will criticize his decision, they understand that issues of campaign finance do not rank high in most voters' minds.

By releasing his first ad of the general election, Obama also diluted the impact of the money story with a strong visual that was likely to dominate television coverage of the campaign. Obama will draw attention to his finances again on Friday, when his campaign files its May fundraising report with the Federal Election Commission.

Obama's decision represents a significant milestone in the financing of presidential campaigns. President Bush was the first candidate to reject public financing of primaries when he ran in 2000. But no candidate has ignored the general election funds since the law setting up the presidential finance system was approved in 1976.

"It's not an easy decision, and especially because I support a robust system of public financing of elections," Obama told supporters in a video message Thursday. "But the public financing of presidential elections as it exists today is broken, and we face opponents who've become masters at gaming this broken system."

McCain sharply rebuked the Illinois senator on Thursday.

"This election is about a lot of things. It's also about trust," McCain said. "It's about keeping your word."

Last year, Obama filled out a questionnaire where he vowed to "aggressively pursue an agreement with the Republican nominee to preserve a publicly financed general election." But since clinching the Democratic nomination earlier this month, Obama has not broached the subject with McCain. The only discussion occurred about two weeks ago between Obama's and McCain's lawyers,

Obama lawyer Robert Bauer said he discussed the public financing issue for 45 minutes on June 6 with McCain counsel Trevor Potter. In interviews and e-mails, both Bauer and Potter agree that Bauer raised concerns about McCain having a head start because he had secured the nomination in early March and Obama did not until June 3. Potter said he told Bauer that given Obama's fundraising "I was sure there would be no McCain advantage by the end of the summer."

That meeting, Potter said, "was not part of any negotiation" on public financing.

At a breakfast with reporters Thursday, Bauer said that after his meeting with Potter, "It became clear to me, and I reported to the campaign, that there really wasn't a basis for further discussion."

Obama has shattered presidential campaign fundraising records, raking in more than $265 million as of the end of April. Of that, nearly $10 million was for the general election, reserved for spending after the party's national convention in August. McCain had raised nearly $115 million by the end of May, eligible for spending before the convention.

On the other hand, Obama's clear financial advantage over McCain is offset in part by the resources of the Republican National Committee, which has far more money in the bank than the Democratic National Committee. Both national parties can spend money on behalf of the presidential candidates.

Obama said McCain and the Republican National Committee are fueled by contributions from Washington lobbyists and political action committees.

"And we've already seen that he's not going to stop the smears and attacks from his allies running so-called 527 groups, who will spend millions and millions of dollars in unlimited donations," Obama said.

Despite that claim, few Republican-leaning groups have weighed into the presidential contest so far. In fact, Obama allies such as MoveOn.org are the ones have been spending money on advertising against McCain.

McCain and Obama both declined public financing in the primary contests, thus avoiding the spending limits that come attached to the money. McCain had initially applied for the money, however, and has been in a dispute with the Federal Election Commission over whether he needed commission approval to decline the primary election funds. The FEC insists that he does, but has not had a quorum to act because four of its six seats have been vacant pending Senate confirmation of presidential nominees. McCain lawyers have disputed the need for FEC approval.
 

Spytheweb

Registered User
Forum Member
Sep 27, 2005
1,171
14
0
"This election is about a lot of things. It's also about trust," McCain said. "It's about keeping your word."

This from a guy who dumped his ill fat wife after she stood by him while he was a POW, to marry a younger and richer woman.

When American does not like the government and gives money to change it, of course you're going to get record amounts, why not use it? McCain can't get the money because people know what he is about.
 

djv

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 4, 2000
13,817
17
0
Good move by Obama. Mc Cain would do same if he could raise that kind of money from so many small contributers. Obama should have enough money to counter the 527. And lets remember Mc Cain only signed up for this money today. He was going other way till then using private money.
 

DOGS THAT BARK

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 13, 1999
19,515
211
63
Bowling Green Ky
Good move--depends on what price a person intergity is worth.

Don't believe $ will be issue as he out spent hilliary
3 to 1 and was trounced following his exposure to radical elements.

Appears his mentor/uncle of 20 years had best take on him so far--"he's a poltician telling you what you want to hear" :)

Heres Russert giving you free look before the fact on Obama--also noted sure fire way of detecting when O's getting ready to lie(ala Bill and finger wagging)--he blinks like frog in hail storm.:142smilie

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ELoKGvOwSI4
 
Last edited:

THE KOD

Registered
Forum Member
Nov 16, 2001
42,552
305
83
Victory Lane
Good move--depends on what price a person intergity is worth.

Don't believe $ will be issue as he out spent hilliary
3 to 1 and was trounced following his exposure to radical elements.
............................................................

integrity :142smilie :142smilie

Like McCain , George w, Willy, Hillary , Nixon, LBJ, Ford, had any of that .

Maybe this will get rid of that stupid lobby finance crap.

McCain cant raise money , he is doomed. :142smilie :mj07:
 

THE KOD

Registered
Forum Member
Nov 16, 2001
42,552
305
83
Victory Lane
art.bomaclean0619.gi.jpg


Listen O , you said you wouldnt do that , and now your doing that, and I won't have as much money, and thats not fair, and I promise I wont call your wife a unpatriotic bitch again, and I won't say you don't understand Iraq, and........

Obama - And you expect me to believe anything that you and George W say ?
 

djv

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 4, 2000
13,817
17
0
Mc Cain should talk he only played games with this last 6 months. Only peson this means much to is him. Anyone with smarts knows this is great move by Obama. If Mc Cain was so worried he would have annouced what he was doing long time ago. Then held Obamas feet to fire. But waiting to same day Obama says what he's doing. Man is that easy to see through.
 

THE KOD

Registered
Forum Member
Nov 16, 2001
42,552
305
83
Victory Lane
Mc Cain should talk he only played games with this last 6 months. Only peson this means much to is him. Anyone with smarts knows this is great move by Obama. If Mc Cain was so worried he would have annouced what he was doing long time ago. Then held Obamas feet to fire. But waiting to same day Obama says what he's doing. Man is that easy to see through.

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

exactamundo :142smilie
 

DOGS THAT BARK

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 13, 1999
19,515
211
63
Bowling Green Ky
............................................................

integrity :142smilie :142smilie

Like McCain , George w, Willy, Hillary , Nixon, LBJ, Ford, had any of that .

Maybe this will get rid of that stupid lobby finance crap.

McCain cant raise money , he is doomed. :142smilie :mj07:

You use same tactics as Obama's campaign--stear the problem away from him an onto another.

Take your list and add Obama--

Now with that list seperate the professional politicians from those that entered politics after successful careers.--you can pretty well draw the line on character as well as numerous other attributes.
 

DOGS THAT BARK

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 13, 1999
19,515
211
63
Bowling Green Ky
Thank You Scott--I like Karl

Speaking of twisting and turning in the wind--more on Obama and tread subject--from Fact Check

Obama's Lame Claim About McCain's Money

Obama says McCain is "fueled" by money from lobbyists and PACs, but those sources account for less than 1.7 percent of McCain's money.
Summary
Obama announced he would become the first presidential candidate since 1972 to rely totally on private donations for his general election campaign, opting out of the system of public financing and spending limits that was put in place after the Watergate scandal.

One reason, he said, is that "John McCain?s campaign and the Republican National Committee are fueled by contributions from Washington lobbyists and special interest PACs."

We find that to be a large exaggeration and a lame excuse. In fact, donations from PACs and lobbyists make up less than 1.7 percent of McCain's total receipts, and they account for only about 1.1 percent of the RNC's receipts.
Analysis
Sen. Barack Obama declared June 19 that he would not accept public funds for his general election campaign and would instead finance it entirely with private donations. Or, as he put it, with money from "the American people." He thus will not be bound by the spending limits that would have come with taxpayer money, and he will be legally free to spend as much as he can manage to raise.

Obama's Explanation

Hi, this is Barack Obama.

I have an important announcement and I wanted all of you ? the people who built this movement from the bottom-up ? to hear it first. We?ve made the decision not to participate in the public-financing system for the general election. This means we?ll be forgoing more than $80 million in public funds during the final months of this election.

It?s not an easy decision, and especially because I support a robust system of public financing of elections. But the public financing of presidential elections as it exists today is broken, and we face opponents who?ve become masters at gaming this broken system. John McCain?s campaign and the Republican National Committee are fueled by contributions from Washington lobbyists and special interest PACs. And we?ve already seen that he?s not going to stop the smears and attacks from his allies running so-called 527 groups, who will spend millions and millions of dollars in unlimited donations.

From the very beginning of this campaign, I have asked my supporters to avoid that kind of unregulated activity and join us in building a new kind of politics ? and you have. Instead of forcing us to rely on millions from Washington lobbyists and special interest PACs, you?ve fueled this campaign with donations of $5, $10, $20, whatever you can afford. And because you did, we?ve built a grassroots movement of over 1.5 million Americans. We?ve won the Democratic nomination by relying on ordinary people coming together to achieve extraordinary things.

You?ve already changed the way campaigns are funded because you know that?s the only way we can truly change how Washington works. And that?s the path we will continue in this general election. I?m asking you to try to do something that?s never been done before. Declare our independence from a broken system, and run the type of campaign that reflects the grassroots values that have already changed our politics and brought us this far.

If we don?t stand together, the broken system we have now, a system where special interests drown out the voices of the American people will continue to erode our politics and prevent the possibility of real change. That?s why we must act. The stakes are higher than ever, and people are counting on us.

Every American who is desperate for a fair economy and affordable health care, who wants to bring our troops back from Iraq. Who hopes for a better education and future for his or her child, these people are relying on us. You and me. This is our moment and our country is depending on us. So join me, and declare your independence from this broken system and let?s build the first general election campaign that?s truly funded by the American people. With this decision this campaign is in your hands in a way that no campaign has ever been before. Now is the time to act. Thank you so much.
A Lame Excuse


However, the first of the two reasons he gave for his decision doesn't square very well with the facts. In a video recording sent to supporters, Obama said:

Obama: We face opponents who?ve become masters at gaming this broken system. John McCain?s campaign and the Republican National Committee are fueled by contributions from Washington lobbyists and special interest PACs.

To say that either the McCain campaign or the RNC are "fueled" by money from lobbyists and PACs is an overstatement, to say the least. Such funds make up less than 1.7 percent of McCain's presidential campaign receipts and 1.1 percent of the RNC's income.

McCain ? As of the end of April, the McCain campaign had reported receiving $655,576 from lobbyists, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. That is less than seven-tenths of 1 percent of his total receipts of $96,654,783. His campaign also took in $960,990 from PACs, amounting to just under 1 percent of total receipts. The two sources combined make up less than 1.7 percent of his total.

RNC ? The Republican National Committee has raised $143,298,225, of which only $135,000 has been come from lobbyists, according to the CRP. That's less than one-tenth of 1 percent. It also took in about 1 percent of its receipts from PACs, CRP said. Taken together, that's about 1.1 percent from PACs and lobbyists.


Obama's Advantage


It's not our place to comment on the wisdom or propriety of Obama's financial strategy, except to note that it is perfectly legal and also that McCain and Obama both refused to accept public funds or spending limits during the primary campaign.

We also note that Obama's decision ? whatever may have motivated it ? is likely to give him a big financial advantage over McCain in the weeks just before the November election. This is a reversal of the historic pattern, in which Republican candidates have nearly always been able to out-raise their Democratic rivals. Had Obama accepted public funds, as McCain is expected to do, both candidates would have been limited to spending $84.1 million, all of it from taxpayers. But Obama has shown the potential for raising and spending much more.

The Obama campaign already has raised $265 million through the end of April, more than two-and-a-half times as much as McCain has taken in. Figures for May are due out soon. The Obama campaign said on May 6 that it had surpassed 1.5 million individual donors, and it probably has many more than that by now. All of those primary donors are legally free to make new contributions to finance Obama's general election campaign, which officially commences after he becomes certified as the Democratic party's nominee at the convention at the end of August.


The lobbyist figures we give here could stand some minor refinement. The totals might be reduced somewhat if the CRP used Obama's rather narrow definition of "lobbyist." Obama makes a point of refusing money from those who are currently registered to lobby at the federal level. The CRP has a broader definition, counting money from anyone working at a lobbying firm, registered or not, state or federal, and their families as well. By CRP's definition Obama himself has taken in $161,927 from lobbyists.

On the other hand, CRP does not count registered lobbyists who work in-house for corporations, industry groups and unions, but classifies them with their industries. Adding those in-house lobbyists to the total could increase the amounts somewhat. But adding donations from in-house lobbyists and subtracting donations from those who don't meet Obama's strict definition would not be likely to change the total by much, and certainly not by enough to justify Obama's claim that McCain and the RNC are "fueled" by such donations.

Also, for what it's worth, the Democratic National Committee has historically been far more reliant on PAC and lobbyist money than the RNC. In 2004, PACs provided about 10 percent of the DNC's total fundraising and only about 1 percent of the RNC's total, according to the CRP. Obama, after he sewed up enough delegates to win the party's nomination, sent word to the DNC to stop accepting PAC and lobbyist donations.

:0corn
 

THE KOD

Registered
Forum Member
Nov 16, 2001
42,552
305
83
Victory Lane
It's not our place to comment on the wisdom or propriety of Obama's financial strategy, except to note that it is perfectly legal and also that McCain and Obama both refused to accept public funds or spending limits during the primary campaign.

We also note that Obama's decision ? whatever may have motivated it ? is likely to give him a big financial advantage over McCain in the weeks just before the November election. This is a reversal of the historic pattern, in which Republican candidates have nearly always been able to out-raise their Democratic rivals. Had Obama accepted public funds, as McCain is expected to do, both candidates would have been limited to spending $84.1 million, all of it from taxpayers. But Obama has shown the potential for raising and spending much more.

The Obama campaign already has raised $265 million through the end of April,
.................................................................

DTB

I love this part.

It figures you would like Karl Rove that scoundral.

Go Obama :00hour

:0corn :0corn
 

THE KOD

Registered
Forum Member
Nov 16, 2001
42,552
305
83
Victory Lane
Published on Friday, July 15, 2005 by Find Law
It Appears That Karl Rove Is In Serious Trouble
by John Dean

As the scandal over the leak of CIA agent Valerie Plame's identity has continued to unfold, there is a renewed focused on Karl Rove -- the White House Deputy Chief of Staff whom President Bush calls his political "architect."

Newsweek has reported that Matt Cooper, in an email to his bureau chief at Time magazine, wrote that he had spoken "to Rove on double super secret background for about two min[ute]s before he went on vacation ..." In that conversation, Rove gave Cooper "big warning" that Time should not "get too far out on Wilson." Rove was referring, of course, to former Ambassador Joe Wilson's acknowledgment of his trip to Africa, where he discovered that Niger had not, in fact, provided uranium to Iraq that might be part of a weapons of mass destruction (WMD) program. Cooper's email indicates that Rove told Cooper that Wilson's trip had not been authorized by CIA Director George Tenet or Vice President Dick Cheney; rather, Rove claimed, "it was ? [W]ilson's wife, who apparently works at the agency on [WMD] issues who authorized the trip." (Rove was wrong about the authorization.)

Only the Special Counsel, Patrick Fitzgerald, and his staff have all the facts on their investigation at this point, but there is increasing evidence that Rove (and others) may have violated one or more federal laws. At this time, it would be speculation to predict whether indictments will be forthcoming.

No Apparent Violation Of The Identities Protection Act

As I pointed out when the Valerie Plame Wilson leak first surfaced, the Intelligence Identities And Protection Act is a complex law. For the law to apply to Rove, a number of requirements must be met.

Rove must have had "authorized access to classified information" under the statute. Plame was an NCO (non-covered officer). White House aides, and even the president, are seldom, if ever, given this information. So it is not likely Rove had "authorized access" to it.

In addition, Rove must have "intentionally" -- not "knowingly" as has been mentioned in the news coverage -- disclosed "any information identifying such a covert agent." Whether or not Rove actually referred to Mrs. Wilson as "Valerie Plame," then, the key would be whether he gave Matt Cooper (or others) information that Joe Wilson's wife was a covert agent. Also, the statute requires that Rove had to know,a as a fact, that the United States was taking, or had taken, "affirmative measures to conceal" Valerie Plame's covert status. Rove's lawyer says he had no such knowledge.

In fact, there is no public evidence that Valerie Wilson had the covert status required by the statute. A covert agent, as defined under this law, is "a present or retired officer or employee" of the CIA, whose identity as such "is classified information," and this person must be serving outside of the United States, or have done so in the last five years.

There is no solid information that Rove, or anyone else, violated this law designed to protect covert CIA agents. There is, however, evidence suggesting that other laws were violated. In particular, I have in mind the laws invoked by the Bush Justice Department in the relatively minor leak case that it vigorously prosecuted, though it involved information that was not nearly as sensitive as that which Rove provided Matt Cooper (and possibly others).
.................................................................

This is all you need to know about Rove.

This was in 2005. He may still have to answer to treason.
 

Jaxx

Go Pokes!
Forum Member
Jan 5, 2003
7,084
88
48
FL
............................................................

DTB

you are beginning to remind me of Karl Rove.
the way you twist and turn in the wind.

Cool picture Scott. Obama was in Jax yesterday and drew a very large crowd. By the end of the day had raised over 1 million. He attacked Mcain and govenor Crist for flip flopping on the offshore drilling on the Florida Coast and preached that he was the canidate of change change change. Change to what? The guy does have chrisma but what else does he have except a overbearing wife that has a huge chip on her shoulder. Personally I do not like my choices but I crossed these two off my list along time ago.
 

DOGS THAT BARK

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 13, 1999
19,515
211
63
Bowling Green Ky
Published on Friday, July 15, 2005 by Find Law
It Appears That Karl Rove Is In Serious Trouble
by John Dean

As the scandal over the leak of CIA agent Valerie Plame's identity has continued to unfold, there is a renewed focused on Karl Rove -- the White House Deputy Chief of Staff whom President Bush calls his political "architect."

Newsweek has reported that Matt Cooper, in an email to his bureau chief at Time magazine, wrote that he had spoken "to Rove on double super secret background for about two min[ute]s before he went on vacation ..." In that conversation, Rove gave Cooper "big warning" that Time should not "get too far out on Wilson." Rove was referring, of course, to former Ambassador Joe Wilson's acknowledgment of his trip to Africa, where he discovered that Niger had not, in fact, provided uranium to Iraq that might be part of a weapons of mass destruction (WMD) program. Cooper's email indicates that Rove told Cooper that Wilson's trip had not been authorized by CIA Director George Tenet or Vice President Dick Cheney; rather, Rove claimed, "it was ? [W]ilson's wife, who apparently works at the agency on [WMD] issues who authorized the trip." (Rove was wrong about the authorization.)

Only the Special Counsel, Patrick Fitzgerald, and his staff have all the facts on their investigation at this point, but there is increasing evidence that Rove (and others) may have violated one or more federal laws. At this time, it would be speculation to predict whether indictments will be forthcoming.

No Apparent Violation Of The Identities Protection Act

As I pointed out when the Valerie Plame Wilson leak first surfaced, the Intelligence Identities And Protection Act is a complex law. For the law to apply to Rove, a number of requirements must be met.

Rove must have had "authorized access to classified information" under the statute. Plame was an NCO (non-covered officer). White House aides, and even the president, are seldom, if ever, given this information. So it is not likely Rove had "authorized access" to it.

In addition, Rove must have "intentionally" -- not "knowingly" as has been mentioned in the news coverage -- disclosed "any information identifying such a covert agent." Whether or not Rove actually referred to Mrs. Wilson as "Valerie Plame," then, the key would be whether he gave Matt Cooper (or others) information that Joe Wilson's wife was a covert agent. Also, the statute requires that Rove had to know,a as a fact, that the United States was taking, or had taken, "affirmative measures to conceal" Valerie Plame's covert status. Rove's lawyer says he had no such knowledge.

In fact, there is no public evidence that Valerie Wilson had the covert status required by the statute. A covert agent, as defined under this law, is "a present or retired officer or employee" of the CIA, whose identity as such "is classified information," and this person must be serving outside of the United States, or have done so in the last five years.

There is no solid information that Rove, or anyone else, violated this law designed to protect covert CIA agents. There is, however, evidence suggesting that other laws were violated. In particular, I have in mind the laws invoked by the Bush Justice Department in the relatively minor leak case that it vigorously prosecuted, though it involved information that was not nearly as sensitive as that which Rove provided Matt Cooper (and possibly others).
.................................................................

This is all you need to know about Rove.

This was in 2005. He may still have to answer to treason.

Point is Scott they went through 3 years and numerous witnesses and got zilch--just like your author.

--of course he may have had agenda--;)

John has long written on the subjects of law, government, and politics, and he recounted his days in the Nixon White House and Watergate in two books, Blind Ambition (1976) and Lost Honor (1982). He lives in Beverly Hills, California with his wife Maureen, and now devotes full time to writing and lecturing, having retired from his career as a private investment banker.

In 2001 he published The Rehnquist Choice: The Untold Story of the Nixon Appointment that Redefined the Supreme Court; in early 2004, Warren G. Harding, followed by Worse Than Watergate: The Secret Presidency of George W. Bush. In 2006, John publihsed Conservatives Without Conscience.
His newest book is Broken Government: How Republican Rule Destroyed the Legislative, Executive, and Judicial Branches.

fair and balanced :)
 

The Sponge

Registered User
Forum Member
Aug 24, 2006
17,263
97
0
McCains integrity? Here is a list of his flipflops. If you have a week to read them check um out.
* McCain supported the drilling moratorium; now he?s against it.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/20...

* McCain strongly opposes a windfall-tax on oil company profits. Three weeks earlier, he was perfectly comfortable with the idea.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/06/18/mccains-offsho...

* McCain thought Bush?s warrantless-wiretap program circumvented the law; now he believes the opposite.
http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/15781.htm...

* McCain defended ?privatizing? Social Security. Now he says he?s against privatization (though he actually still supports it.)
http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/15863.htm...

* McCain wanted to change the Republican Party platform to protect abortion rights in cases of rape and incest. Now he doesn?t.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/05/10/mccain-flips-o...

* McCain thought the estate tax was perfectly fair. Now he believes the opposite.
http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/15825.htm...

* He opposed indefinite detention of terrorist suspects. When the Supreme Court reached the same conclusion,he called it ?one of the worst decisions in the history of this country.?
http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/15864.htm...

* McCain said he would ?not impose a litmus test on any nominee.? He used to promise the opposite.
http://www.americablog.com/2008/06/now-mccain-is-flip-f...

* McCain believes the telecoms should be forced to explain their role in the administration?s warrantless surveillance program as a condition for retroactive immunity. He used to believe the opposite.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/20...

* McCain supported storing spent nuclear fuel at Yucca Mountain in Nevada. Now he believes the opposite.
http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2008/may/28/mccains-abo... /

* McCain supported moving ?towards normalization of relations? with Cuba. Now he believes the opposite.
http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/15617.htm...

* McCain believed the U.S. should engage in diplomacy with Hamas. Now he believes the opposite.
http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/15557.htm...

* McCain believed the U.S. should engage in diplomacy with Syria. Now he believes the opposite.
http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/15564.htm...

* He argued the NRA should not have a role in the Republican Party?s policy making. Now he believes the opposite.
http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/15573.htm...

* McCain supported his own lobbying-reform legislation from 1997. Now he doesn?t.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/05/20/mccains-97-lob...

* He wanted political support from radical televangelists like John Hagee and Rod Parsley. Now he doesn?t.
http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/15633.htm...

* McCain supported the Lieberman/Warner legislation to combat global warming. Now he doesn?t.
http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/15699.htm...

*McCain pledged in February 2008 that he would not, under any circumstances, raise taxes. Specifically, McCain was asked if he is a??read my lips? candidate, no new taxes, no matter what?? referring to George H.W. Bush?s 1988 pledge. ?No new taxes,? McCain responded.Two weeks later, McCain said, ?I?m not making a ?read my lips? statement, in that I will not raise taxes.?
http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/14761.htm...

* McCain is both for and against a ?rogue state rollback? as a focus of his foreign policy vision.
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/04/mccain-...

* McCain says he considered and did not consider joining John Kerry?s Democratic ticket in 2004.
http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/14818.htm...

*In 1998, he championed raising cigarette taxes to fund programs to cut underage smoking, insisting that it would prevent illnesses and provide resources for public health programs. Now, McCain opposes a $0.61-per-pack tax increase, won?t commit to supporting a regulation bill he?s co-sponsoring, and has hired Philip Morris? former lobbyist as his senior campaign adviser.
http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/15033.htm...

* McCain has changed his economic worldview on multiple occasions.
http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/15337.htm...

* McCain has changed his mind about a long-term U.S. military presence in Iraq on multiple occasions.
http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/15370.htm...

* McCain is both for and against attacking Barack Obama over his former pastor at his former church.
http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/15358.htm...

* McCain believes Americans are both better and worse off than they were before Bush took office.
http://thinkprogress.org/2008/04/19/mccain-economy-bloo... /

* McCain is both for and against earmarks for Arizona.
http://thinkprogress.org/2008/01/06/mccain-earmark /

* McCain believes his endorsement from radical televangelist John Hagee was both a good and bad idea.
http://thinkprogress.org/2008/04/21/hagee-flip-flop /

*McCain?s first mortgage plan was premised on the notion that homeowners facing foreclosure shouldn?t be ?rewarded? for acting?irresponsibly.?His second mortgage plan took largely the opposite position.
http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/15176.htm...

* McCain vowed, if elected, to balance the federal budget by the end of his first term. Soon after, he decided he would no longer even try to reach that goal.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/16/us/politics/16mccain....

* In February 2008, McCain reversed course on prohibiting waterboarding.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/04/10/emtimeem-has-m...

* McCain used to champion the Law of the Sea convention, even volunteering to testify on the treaty?s behalf before a Senate committee. Now he opposes it.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2007/oct/31/mccain-... /

* McCain was a co-sponsor of the DREAM Act, which would grant legal status to illegal immigrants? kids who graduate from high school. Now he?s against it.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2007/oct/31/mccain-... /

* On immigration policy in general, McCain announced in February 2008 that he would vote against his own legislation.
http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/14447.htm...

*In 2006, McCain sponsored legislation to require grassroots lobbying coalitions to reveal their financial donors. In 2007, after receiving?feedback? on the proposal, McCain told far-right activist groups that he opposes his own measure.
http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/9658.html

* McCain said before the war in Iraq, ?We will win this conflict. We will win it easily.? Four years later, McCain said he knew all along that the war in Iraq war was ?probably going to be long and hard and tough.?
http://electioncentral.tpmcafe.com/blog/electioncentral...

*McCain said he was the ?greatest critic? of Rumsfeld?s failed Iraq policy. In December 2003, McCain praised the same strategy as?a mission accomplished.? In March 2004, he said, ?I?m confident we?re on the right course.?In December 2005, he said, ?Overall, I think a year from now, we will have made a fair amount of progress if we stay the course.?
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/08/18/mccain-greatest-cri... /

* McCain went from saying he would not support repeal of Roe v. Wade http://mediamatters.org/items/200610310003 to saying the exact opposite.http://thinkprogress.org/2006/11/19/mccain-abortion /

* McCain went from saying gay marriage should be allowed, to saying gay marriage shouldn?t be allowed.
http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2007/02/mcc...

* McCain criticized TV preacher Jerry Falwell as ?an agent of intolerance? in 2002, but then decided to cozy up to the man who said Americans ?deserved? the 9/11 attacks.
http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/6988.html

* McCain used to oppose Bush?s tax cuts for the very wealthy, but he reversed course in February.
http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/6731.html

* On a related note, he said 2005 that he opposed the tax cuts because they were ?too tilted to the wealthy.? By 2007, he denied ever having said this, and insisted he opposed the cuts because of increased government spending.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/03/us/politics/03mccain....

*In 2000, McCain accused Texas businessmen Sam and Charles Wyly of being corrupt, spending ?dirty money? to help finance Bush?s presidential campaign. McCain not only filed a complaint against the Wylys for allegedly violating campaign finance law, he also lashed out at them publicly. In April, McCain reached out to the Wylys for support.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=1880630&page=1

* McCain supported a major campaign-finance reform measure that bore his name. In June 2007, he abandoned his own legislation.
http://www.nysun.com/national/campaign-finance-effort-r... /

* McCain opposed a holiday to honor Martin Luther King, Jr., before he supported it.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/usnw/20070115/pl_usnw/dnc__mcca...

* McCain was against presidential candidates campaigning at Bob Jones University before he was for it.
http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/8313.html

* McCain was anti-ethanol. Now he?s pro-ethanol.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15637887 /

* McCain was both for and against state promotion of the Confederate flag.
http://mediamatters.org/items/200610310003

* McCain decided in2000 that he didn?t want anything to do with former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, believing he ?would taint the image of the?Straight Talk Express.?? Kissinger is now the Honorary Co-Chair for his presidential campaign in New York.
http://thinkprogress.org/2006/12/19/mccain-kissinger /

* McCain used to think that Grover Norquist was a crook and acorrupt shill for dictators. Then McCain got serious about running for president and began to reconcile with Norquist.
http://thinkprogress.org/2006/12/19/mccain-kissinger /

* McCain took a firm line in opposition to torture, and then caved to White House demands.
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/20...

* McCain gave up on his signature policy issue, campaign-finance reform, and won?t back the same provision he sponsored just a couple of years ago.
http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/8066.html

* And now he?s both for and against overturning Roe v. Wade.
http://thinkprogress.org/2006/11/19/mccain-abortion /
 

THE KOD

Registered
Forum Member
Nov 16, 2001
42,552
305
83
Victory Lane
fosbury%20flop.jpg


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

wow thats alot of flip flops.

Reminds me of the Fosbury flop at the Olympics.

I thnk McCain would have a heart attack if he tried to jump over 3 ft.
 
Last edited:

DOGS THAT BARK

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 13, 1999
19,515
211
63
Bowling Green Ky
Sponge Didn't have time to go through your list so if you don't mind could you point us to the ones that he broke word for his own personal gain.
Goes to the--"at what price do you sell your intgrity"--issue

I'll be waiting :)
 

The Sponge

Registered User
Forum Member
Aug 24, 2006
17,263
97
0
Sponge Didn't have time to go through your list so if you don't mind could you point us to the ones that he broke word for his own personal gain.
Goes to the--"at what price do you sell your intgrity"--issue

I'll be waiting :)

All his flips were for personal gain.:shrug: He is pandering for the nitwit vote and he realizes he now has to support these issues to get that nitwit vote.
 
Bet on MyBookie
Top